Microplastics update, the news is not good

[pilott]

I recently heard a BBC podcast ( Inside Science) which mentioned a study that identified the type of polymer in the micro plastics. It showed that polyurethane was a common constituent, indicating that a major source of microplastics in the marine environment is eroded/abraded paint & varnish.

[GordMay]

“Primary Microplastics in the Oceans : a Global Evaluation of Sources”
☞ https://portals.iucn.org/library/sit...s/2017-002.pdf

Excerpted from the abstract:

“... Plastic wastes include all size residues, from large visible and easily removable items, to small invisible particles This report investigates the sources of primary microplastics i e microplastics that are directly released into the environment as small plastic particles (< 5 mm size) This contrasts with secondary microplastics that originate mostly from the degradation of large plastic waste into smaller plastic fragments once exposed to the marine environment ...
... The model developed for this analysis enables us to conclude that between 15 and 31% of all of the plastic in the oceans could originate from primary sources ...
... The global release of primary microplastics into the ocean was estimated at 1 5 million tons per year (Mtons/year) The estimate ranges between 0 8 and 2 5 Mtons/year according to an optimistic or pessimistic scenario ...
... The overwhelming majority of the losses of primary microplastics (98%) are generated from land-based activities Only 2% is generated from activities at sea The largest proportion of these particles stem from the laundering of synthetic textiles and from the abrasion of tyres while driving. Most of the releases to the oceans are occurring from the use of products (49%) or the maintenance of products (28%) The main pathways of these plastics into the ocean are through road runoff (66%), wastewater treatment systems (25%) and wind transfer (7%) ...”

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Nicholson58

If you want to effect a change, put a net across the mouths of the five ten rivers contributing 88 - 95% of the total plastic waste transported by rivers to the oceans. Clue, not in the US or EU. It is pointless to mine the mid ocean gyres when you could eliminate the sources for pennies on the dollar. The low hanging fruit here is falling to the ground.

FIFY.

https://factcheck.afp.com/widely-cit...just-10-rivers


Now, about the other 50 - 90 % of plastics in the oceans... ?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by StuM

FIFY.

https://factcheck.afp.com/widely-cit...just-10-rivers


Now, about the other 50 - 90 % of plastics in the oceans... ?

The problem for me in this article is that nowhere does it actually identify which rivers.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by newhaul

The problem for me in this article is that nowhere does it actually identify which rivers.

I listed them previously when there was debate about how many are in China.


The Yangtze, the Indus, Yellow River, Hai River, the Nile, the Ganges, Pearl River, Amur River, the Niger, and the Mekong (in that order)


And incidentally, it's not even all plastics transport by rivers, just the estimate of the plastics transported by 1350 large rivers around the world based on various historical studies of some of those rivers combined with complex computer modelling. (And huge error bars!)

[Lake-Effect]

Not microplastics related, but to do with plastic and rivers:
Amsterdam has a bubble barrier to catch canal plastic


... and John already posted this two pages ago (different source) . Oh well.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by StuM

I listed them previously when there was debate about how many are in China.


The Yangtze, the Indus, Yellow River, Hai River, the Nile, the Ganges, Pearl River, Amur River, the Niger, and the Mekong (in that order)


And incidentally, it's not even all plastics transport by rivers, just the estimate of the plastics transported by 1350 large rivers around the world based on various historical studies of some of those rivers combined with complex computer modelling. (And huge error bars!)

Domo arigato

[Neale]

Ocean clean up is great, recycling is good too. But unless we can stop the flow of plastic into the ocean it's going to be a constant battle. This is not a problem that can be solved overnight. Alternatives to plastic need to be introduced to consumers, then the consumers need to adopt those alternatives. It's a long process.

[RaymondR]

A few statistics from an article in the Dec 7 New Scientist.

8.3 billion tonnes of plastics ever produced.

5.0 billion tonnes of plastics now in land fill.

68,000 microplastics we eat in a year from particles falling on our food.

700 billion microplastics generated in an average house per year.

800 microplastic particles in a portion of mussels.

From a bargraph, the other leading, non litter breakdown, sources as a percentage of the total plastics in the sea:

Synthetic textiles in clothing, 35%

Tyres, 27%

City dust, 23%

Road markings, Coatings on ships, 3%

Personal care products, 2%

Plastic pellets, 1%

Interesting that the biggest percentage comes from the breakdown of clothing in washing machines.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

A few statistics from an article in the Dec 7 New Scientist.

8.3 billion tonnes of plastics ever produced.

5.0 billion tonnes of plastics now in land fill.

68,000 microplastics we eat in a year from particles falling on our food.

700 billion microplastics generated in an average house per year.

800 microplastic particles in a portion of mussels.

From a bargraph, the other leading, non litter breakdown, sources as a percentage of the total plastics in the sea:

Synthetic textiles in clothing, 35%

Tyres, 27%

City dust, 23%

Road markings, Coatings on ships, 3%

Personal care products, 2%

Plastic pellets, 1%

Interesting that the biggest percentage comes from the breakdown of clothing in washing machines.

so the biggest thing we can do then is what I already do as much as possible..
Wear natural fiber clothing. ( cotton and wool )

[Salty Fox]

Hi-

I work in global science policy, and in the spirit of keeping this to the facts and science, I think the best response I can give is a little primer in science and technology...

We all know about the controversy of science denial, but very few people have enough science knowledge to make a critical judgment about the facts they receive. This is fundamental to understanding scientific information and advice.

First, you must understand that the scientific community knows almost nothing about almost everything. This may sound outrageous, but it's true. For example, how is the amount of plastic in the world's oceans known by science? Answer: it's not known, and here is why...

Some very small group of marine scientists who have been funded by some exceedingly small group of sponsors (like NOAA and NSF, if you live in the US; possibly UNESCO and H2020 if you live in the EU; probably nobody if you live anywhere else) receive limited funds to design a method to collect representative samples of ocean water from around the world, and then use those samples to calculate the total amount of plastics in the world's oceans.

As we found with this recent study, the methods those researchers have used drastically underestimated the total amount of plastics in the oceans. Furthermore, even the new study does not accurately capture the true amount of plastics in the oceans. It is just another estimate.

This example goes to the fundamental difference between how scientists think and how the public thinks. All scientists know that methodology and models are really just tools and references, and not facts themselves. So is it a fact that there are 10,000 microplastics/liter of water? Sure. Is it a fact that there are 8.3M microplastics/liter of water? Probably. Is the true number way higher? Possibly.

So.... the reason for this little primer is to inform and empower this community to use your common sense. We know that the world is filled with man-made trash and toxins, because we see it all around us. We also know that each of us is culpable, because we are the species creating disposable waste and poisoning the natural environment. It's not barn owls manufacturing plastic bags, right?

We don't need scientific facts to prove something as obvious as our own environmental destruction. The only question out there is: what are YOU going to do about it?

What sacrifice are YOU going to make?

What effort are YOU going to make to fix the problems we all face?

And do you even care? If you care, then what is your responsibility?

Nobody is going to punish you for not caring, even if you contribute to the problem. Some people will celebrate you for making the problem worse. And let's be honest--this isn't really *our* problem. Everyone on this forum is going to live and die just fine. It's your grandchildren and possibly your children who are going to suffer. And if more than half the people in the US or in the world cared about that, we do something, because people act on things we care about.

It bums me out to say it, but the real fact here is that people just don't care. The reasons *why* people don't care are political, so I won't comment on that.

[john61ct]

I think the extent to which humans

care about "others", outside their close family

much less outside their tribe however they define it

even much less humanity in general

is greatly exaggerated in the minds of those who like think along these lines.

So some idealized concern for hypothetical future generations is IMO practically non existent.

Most people live their lives as if they have no concern about **their own** future selves, as in, working hard to learn while in school, saving for old age etc.

[Salty Fox]

Originally Posted by john61ct

I think the extent to which humans

care about "others", outside their close family

much less outside their tribe however they define it

even much less humanity in general

is greatly exaggerated in the minds of those who like think along these lines.

So some idealized concern for hypothetical future generations is IMO practically non existent.

Most people live their lives as if they have no concern about **their own** future selves, as in, working hard to learn while in school, saving for old age etc.

That's the truth!

[Salty Fox]

Originally Posted by pilott

I recently heard a BBC podcast ( Inside Science) which mentioned a study that identified the type of polymer in the micro plastics. It showed that polyurethane was a common constituent, indicating that a major source of microplastics in the marine environment is eroded/abraded paint & varnish.

All of the synthetics on your boat contribute to the problem: nylon lines and sails, fuels and grease, varnish, fiberglass hull, plastic parts and components of the boat itself. They're cheap and durable, so synthetics are going to be used by the vast majority of sailors until they are outlawed.

There's no way around it. It's wrong, but as long as we continue to overpopulate the planet, more and more people will continue to produce and use cheap materials to serve their wants and needs. That's just how people work.

[mdenize]

the bad news just gets worse if ever there was a good reason to live an organic remote lifestyle it is this...

(CNN)Globally, we are ingesting an average of 5 grams of plastic every week, the equivalent of a credit card, a new study suggests.

This plastic contamination comes from "microplastics" -- particles smaller than five millimeters -- which are making their way into our food, drinking water and even the air.
Around the world, people ingest an average of around 2,000 microplastic particles a week, according to the study by the University of Newcastle, in Australia.

https://www.newcastle.edu.au/newsroo...it-card-a-week