I'm not keen on plastic bits getting everywhere but none of the reports I've seen have described how they cause harm.
For example there was a report last night about a river near Manchester which has the "highest levels of plastic particles ever seen" and they showed containers of sediment from the bottom of the river.
Why do plastic particles do more harm than bits of gravel?
Especially when they come from drinking water bottles (TV news story tonight) which (presumably) don't contain leachable plasticiser.
I *can* see the case for banning the relatively unnecessary microbeads in cosmetics and the like, particularly since there is no practicable way of trapping them in current water treatment plants.
As for in bottled water nobody seems to know what possible harm they may cause (more research = more money = can I have a job please)
In the environment, it seems some animals/fish cant tell the difference between plastic and food. If they fill up on plastic they have no room for nutritious food and hence suffer/die from malnutrition.
Turtles eat a lot of jellyfish, apparently, but can't distinguish a floating polythene bag from a jellyfish, so try and eat it, with consequent digestive problems.
While I can understand problems of that nature, the harm done by microplastics, if any, it less obvious. In a lot of cases it must just pass straight through, much like it does when your dog eats a plastic toy.
Then there's this:
But they don't 'fill up' with gravel and other inedible things, why do they react to plastic differently?
Well I'm no expert (only repeating what I have read) it seems that a lot of things fish eat are translucent, like small bits of plastic are, and small bits of plastic can be suspended in gentle water flows. The gravel etc would normally not scatter light in the same way and would be confined to the bottom of the river bed. (I don't know if bottom feeders can distinguish between gravel/plastic/food)
And yet still Ocado stick a shrink wrapped caulifower in a thin clear bag then in a carrier bag!
Veg out to be sold loose, and for the purposes of home delivery, packed into paper bags.
I've seen it argued that paper bags are less "green" - possibly higher energy input, but:
1) They will never be a problem if dropped, throw in a water way or the sea;2) I can compost them - in fact extra carbon in the heap is a good thing if you stuff a lot of high nitrogen grass in.
Why this *obvious* solution is not mandatory, eludes me...
Then the stupid ones will die out.
Yes, quite, but a polythene bag is hardly a micro-perticle.
Not only higher energy input for manufacture but also in distribution. Paper bags are a lot heavier and more bulky than plastic hence more lorries needed for distribution - just think of the CO2 ;-)
very true
That's also true but I think the number of homes with a compost pile is probably quite small.
I worked in the US for a while in the mid '90s. At the grocery checkout I was always asked "paper or plastic" and they didn't mean how was I going to pay but how was I going to carry the stuff away. Don't know if you still get the option.
You may well be right, however in that case I wish the presenters wouldn't show a bucket of gravel from the bottom of the river.
I agree with all that. Much greater effort should be devoted to recycling plastics. They do it in other countries, so why not here? I know that composite packaging makes it a bit more difficult (two or more types of plastic welded together or whatever), but mfrs should be able to get around that, just as recyclers should be able to develop systems for separating it into its component types.
And as one of the comments to that Wattsupwiththat article pointed out, there must surely be bacteria that can digest plastics, and in that case the more micro it is the better. After all, bacteria happily chomp their way through emulsified oil slicks...
Reported recently the bigger problem are particles smaller than micro-beads originating from machine washing cloths with synthetic fibers
Many have a garden waste service that is composted :)
how come you survived
I have eyesight and a sense of smell and taste.
Unlike you who doesn't even know what quoting is. Learn to operate your newsreader.
I only use Ocado for dog food, but taking the supermarket case, why do they sometimes "shrink wrap" brocoli? (My Sains and Tesco don't shrink wrap cauliflower, but they sometimes have them in loose polythene).
I've no idea, but I assume that when supermarkets do this, they have a reason. Maybe for handling, maybe for labelling, maybe for shelf life? Extra plastic at this stage is a cost for them, and as far as I can see they will only be doing it IF THAT GIVES THEM A BENEFIT. And basic Adam Smith says that this doesn't increase their profits, the benefit comes to us as consumers.
Now, if there is a true hidden cost (poisoned turtles, etc) then we should try to put it into the equation, like the supermarket plastic bag charge, for example.
But the currently fashionable model, that supermarkets use all this plastic because somehow it increases their profits, and that it we should support ethical shops instead, is just flawed. I'm happy to accept that plastics in the sea may well often be a bad thing. The thing to do then is to say where do they come from, how do they get into the sea. Some of it might be bad management in tips. Another route is lazy holidaymakers, leaving drinks bottles on the beach. Another might be dumping from cruise or commercial shipping. Tackle the problem at this point.
To my mind, the best fix is likely to be incinerators, such as the one which is currently under construction locally. This gets rid of stuff which is very hard to recycle, and generates useful electricity. But ironically, those who most want to "save the planet" are also the first to oppose them.
I did read that a few major rivers, several of which are in China, contribute most of the plastic waste to the sea (not that this doesn't mean that we should try to do better here). The reason is that waste collection and recycling just don't exist in large parts of rural China, so it all gets thrown in the rivers.
The difficulty will be to get such as the Chinese to accept that there is a problem.
Very true. A bit like carbon emissions. Faffing about with supermarkets might give you a warm feeling, but does nothing for the problem (assuming there really is one).
The thing which *really* bothers me, from my cynical old fart's perspective, is that so few people seem to be challenging the simplistic views peddled by all and sundry.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.