|
Gothenburg canal near Drottningstorget, 06.02.16, both natural debris and plastics drifting on the water |
Plastic as a production
and packaging material has the strong advantage to be relatively cheap and to have
an excellent user convenience “- combining unrivalled functional properties
with low cost” (WEF, 2016, p.6) as the report the New Plastics Economy
puts it. But additional to the assumed low costs for producers and consumers appear
external costs, as typical for many economic activities. Externalities occur
first from production emissions, contributing to global warming, and second
from pollution of natural systems where the plastic is not taken care of
properly after its use phase. In addition, the material is lost from the cycle
if plastic is littered instead of recycled or at least incinerated for energy
re-generation. Consequently plastic materials are not that cheap any more if external
costs on the environment are taken into account. About a third of plastic
packaging is not collected suitably but instead released into surrounding ecosystems,
causing substantial costs to the economy “by reducing the productivity of vital
natural systems such as the ocean” (WEF, 2016, p.6). Due to its extreme
durability, plastics have very a long lifetime and are estimated to persist for
centuries (Engler, 2012). The impacts of plastic on the ocean in general as
well as on marine ecosystems will be assessed further in the following. (WEF,
2016)
Abundance
Sources
So the first question to be answered is where does it
come from; that is what different sources are there for marine plastic debris? One
source is the fishing industry with its many small and big vessels that often
simply dump their waste including old gear such as fishing nets into the ocean
(Sheavly & Register, 2007). According to Hammer et
al. (2011) stems debris from ocean-based sources from basically all kinds of
ships and ocean activities that exist (merchant ships, ferries and cruise
liners, military and research vessel, boats used for recreational purposes,
offshore oil and gas platforms, and of course the already mentioned fishing
vessels).
Though most debris (80%) comes from land-based sources
which include everything that is carried to the coast from inland by rivers and
everything that is transported by wind or water level changes into the sea (Jambeck
et al, 2015). Also, some waste is dumped into the ocean on purpose in nation
states or regions where there is lack of proper waste management and of
knowledge. However, small plastic particles pose an even bigger threat to
ecosystems than big pieces of plastic, as the so-called microplastics (mostly
described as smaller than 5 mm) are often bioavailable and accumulate in the
food chain (Wright et al, 2013; Moore, 2008). Their sources are on the one side
the weathering down of bigger plastic debris into smaller and smaller fragments
through solar radiation and wave movements etc. (Andrady, 2011; Mani et al,
2015; Kershaw et al, 2011). On the other side, plastic particles can also
derive directly from sources like industry, cosmetic products or clothing in a
very small size. If coming from industry, pellets are spilled accidentally
during ship transport or emitted with waste waters from production processes
(Duxbury, 1992). Next, microplastics can be found in several cosmetics such as
toothpaste or facial cleansers where the particles are used for their scrubbing
effect (Fendall & Sewell, 2009; Gregory, 1996). Otherwise originates a huge
amount of fibres as a rub-off of synthetic clothing from washing machines every
day (Browne et al, 2011; Katsnelson, 2015).
Transport routes and distribution
Microplastics are
relatively evenly distributed at coasts and often it is not possible to link
measured concentrations to urban or industrial areas (Claessens et al., 2011).
Thus sea currents distribute particles all around the globe, though in varying
concentrations (Andrady, 2011; Derraik, 2002; Sherman & van Sebille, 2016).
But the role of rivers as transporters of plastic is significant, as they carry
their plastic load from inlands to the oceans (Claessens et al., 2011). That is
why most plastic particles can be found near the cost and in the so-called
ocean-gyres (Cole et al, 2011). These are vast patches in between the
continents where ocean currents concentrate floating particles due to their
flow conditions (Cole et al, 2011). The most commonly known one of these gyres
is the Great Pacific garbage patch in between North America and Southeast Asia
(Kaiser, 2010).
Figur 1: Schematic plastic
flows from Ryan et al, 2009
Impacts
Threats to marine biota
Plastic items in the
oceans pose an often fatal risk to a growing number of marine species. Sea
turtles, whale species and seals are reported to suffer most from getting
entangled into debris objects which makes them starve, strangle or suffocate to
death eventually. Then, ingestion of plastic particles occurs most excessively
for ocean-feeding birds and is probably known the longest for albatrosses who
feed plastics to their chicks as well. The smaller the items are, the smaller
also the species that swallow them. So plankton can ingest microplastics, small
fish eat that plankton and plastic particles, bigger fish eat the smaller fish
and plastics, which is eaten by marine birds and so forth. Even turtles for
instance seem to mistake plastic bags for jellyfish, so they feed on them.
(Hammer et al, 2012; Wright et al, 2013; Wilcox et al, 2015; Gregory, 2009)
Other impacts
Hammer et al. (2012)
estimate that 70% of all marine debris sooner or later sinks to the sea floor.
Therefore the impact of particles on the bottom of the ocean also needs to be
addressed. The impact of plastic accumulated on the sea floor is a hindered gas
exchange between the ground sediments and the water layers on top of it, which
might lead to anaerobic milieus and affects the biota that live in and on the
ocean bed (Moore, 2008). A further point of concern is the spread of invasive
species via plastic items as biota encrusted to floating particles can easily
enter alien habitats (Gregory, 2009).
Contaminants
As Van Cauwenberghe and
Janssen formulate it are “threats to human health through the consumption of
microplastics present in seafood […] becoming apparent” (2014, p. 69). Their
research proved that microplastics were present in both blue mussels and
oysters and a conclusion is that humans who eat shellfish are thus exposed to some
plastic-associated ecotoxicity as well. Yet they stated that further studies
are necessary to evaluate to what extent chemical contaminants are conveyed to
humans by seafood and to estimate the risk related to that (Van Cauwenberghe
& Janssen, 2014).
More in detail,
plastics carry toxic additives that determine their properties for the intended
use which can be transferred to marine biota through plastic ingestion (Engler,
2012). Additionally, plastic particles adsorb chemical substances that the
oceans contain in low concentrations and accumulate these on their surface
(Seltenrich, 2015). The toxics are mostly durable and can cause severe
disturbance in the hormone system (endocrine disruptors) as well as accrue over
the food chain (Engler, 2012). PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls) and BPA
(bisphenol A) are among the most well-known ones of these substances.
Consequently, humans are exposed to this threat with potentially accumulated
concentrations of toxics when consuming seafood (Seltenrich, 2015).