The answer, unfortunately, is often waterways, where the tiny microplastic particles from the tires’ synthetic rubber carry several chemicals that can transfer into fish, crabs and perhaps even the people who eat them.

We are analytical and environmental chemists who are studying ways to remove those microplastics – and the toxic chemicals they carry – before they reach waterways and the aquatic organisms that live there.

Microplastics, macro-problem

Millions of metric tons of plastic waste enter the world’s oceans every year. In recent times, tire wear particles have been found to account for about 45% of all microplastics in both terrestrial and aquatic systems.

Tires shed tiny microplastics as they move over roadways. Rain washes those tire wear particles into ditches, where they flow into streams, lakes, rivers and oceans.

Along the way, fish, crabs, oysters and other aquatic life often find these tire wear particles in their food. With each bite, the fish also consume extremely toxic chemicals that can affect both the fish themselves and whatever creatures eat them.

Do experts have something to add to public debate?

Some fish species, like rainbow trout, brook trout and coho salmon, are dying from toxic chemicals linked to tire wear particles.

Researchers in 2020 found that more than half of the coho salmon returning to streams in Washington state died before spawning, largely because of 6PPD-Q, a chemical stemming from 6PPD, which is added to tires to help keep them from degrading.

But the effects of tire wear particles aren’t just on aquatic organisms. Humans and animals alike may be exposed to airborne tire wear particles, especially people and animals who live near major roadways.

In a study in China, the same chemical, 6PPD-Q, was also found in the urine of children and adults. While the effects of this chemical on the human body are still being studied, recent research shows that exposure to this chemical could harm multiple human organs, including the liver, lungs and kidneys.

In Oxford, Mississippi, we identified more than 30,000 tire wear particles in 24 liters of stormwater runoff from roads and parking lots after two rainstorms. In heavy traffic areas, we believe the concentrations could be much higher.

The Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council, a states-led coalition, in 2023 recommended identifying and deploying alternatives to 6PPD in tires to reduce 6PPD-Q in the environment. But tire manufacturers say there’s no suitable replacement yet.

What can communities do to reduce harm?

At the University of Mississippi, we are experimenting with sustainable ways of removing tire wear particles from waterways with accessible and low-cost natural materials from agricultural wastes.

The idea is simple: Capture the tire wear particles before they reach the streams, rivers and oceans.

In a recent study, we tested pine wood chips and biochar – a form or charcoal made from heating rice husks in a limited oxygen chamber, a process known as pyrolysis – and found they could remove approximately 90% of tire wear particles from water runoff at our test sites in Oxford.

Biochar is an established material for removing contaminants from water due to its large surface area and pores, abundant chemical binding groups, high stability, strong adsorption capacity and low cost. Wood chips, because of their rich composition of natural organic compounds, have also been shown to remove contaminants. Other scientists have also used sand to filter out microplastics, but its removal rate was low compared with biochar.

We designed a biofiltration system using biochar and wood chips in a filter sock and placed it at the mouth of a drainage outlet. Then we collected stormwater runoff samples and measured the tire wear particles before and after the biofilters were in place during two storms over the span of two months. The concentration of tire wear particles was found to be significantly lower after the biofilter was in place.

The unique elongated and jagged features of tire wear particles make it easy for them to get trapped or entangled in the pores of these materials during a storm event. Even the smallest tire wear particles were trapped in the intricate network of these materials.

Using biomass filters in the future

We believe this approach holds strong potential for scalability to mitigate tire wear particle pollution and other contaminants during rainstorms.

Since biochar and wood chips can be generated from agricultural waste, they are relatively inexpensive and readily available to local communities.

Long-term monitoring studies will be needed, especially in heavy traffic environments, to fully determine the effectiveness and scalability of the approach. The source of the filtering material is also important. There have been some concerns about whether raw farm waste that has not undergone pyrolysis could release organic pollutants.

Like most filters, the biofilters would need to be replaced over time – with used filters disposed of properly – since the contaminants build up and the filters degrade.

Plastic waste is harming the environment, the food people eat and potentially human health. We believe biofilters made from plant waste could be an effective and relatively inexpensive, environmentally friendly solution.

• from The Conversation

“Imagine a baby in the womb, completely reliant on its mother for air, water, and nutrients—and yet, plastic chemicals are already finding their way into that sacred space,” he said, his voice trembling with emotion. “That baby has no choice. And neither do future generations if we don’t act now.”

Related IPS Articles

• Chumbe Island: How Tanzania is Leading the Charge to Save Our Oceans
• Waves of Change: From the Glittering Shores of Nice to Struggling Seaweed Farmers in Zanzibar
• Global Push to Protect Oceans Gains Momentum Ahead of UN Conference in Nice

Orona’s stark imagery marked a powerful appeal to the high-level delegation at the UN Ocean Conference on June 10 in Nice, where ministers and representatives from 95 countries backed The Nice Wake-Up Call—a collective demand for an ambitious, legally binding U.N. plastics treaty that addresses the full lifecycle of plastic pollution.

For Orona, the issue is deeply personal and spiritual. “In our culture, the womb is the beginning of the circle of life. Polluting it with plastics is like violating a sacred trust,” he said.

A Crisis in the Making

Plastics are now everywhere—in our oceans, our food, and even our bodies. In 2019 alone, an estimated 28 million metric tons of plastic ended up in the environment—equivalent to dumping the weight of the Titanic into nature every day. Without aggressive intervention, that figure could nearly double by 2040.

For  Orona, who doubles as UNEP co-chair of the Indigenous Peoples Major Group, the negotiations unfolding ahead of the August talks in Geneva are a fight for survival.

Speaking to reporters aboard the WWF Panda, Orona, a descendant of the Tongva, Chumash, and Borrado tribes, did not mince words. “For Indigenous peoples and frontline communities, plastic pollution is not just an environmental issue—it is a human rights crisis that has been going on for generations,” he said.

With the Mediterranean breeze brushing across the harbor, Orona’s voice cut through the chatter of press briefings and policy handouts. “Our communities live near the extraction sites, the refineries, the chemical plants, the incinerators, and the waste dumps. We are the first to feel the impacts—in our lungs, our water, our food, and our children’s health. And too often, we are the last to be consulted.”

The declaration known as The Nice Wake-Up Call, endorsed by 95 countries at the conference, was a welcome shift in tone for many in the Indigenous rights movement. “It sends a strong signal that many governments are now recognizing what we’ve been saying for decades—that ending plastic pollution means addressing the full life cycle of plastics: from extraction to production to disposal,” Orona said.

From Environmental Damage to Systemic Injustice

Orona, who also represents the International Indigenous Peoples Forum on Plastics and is part of the Plastics Environment Justice Delegation, emphasized that plastic pollution must be understood in the context of historical and ongoing systems of exploitation.

“This is a continuation of environmental racism and systemic injustices. The human rights violations and violence that have been normalized in our communities for generations must stop,” he said.

Citing the disproportionate exposure of Indigenous populations to toxic chemicals used in plastics—some linked to cancer, reproductive harm, and endocrine disruption—he called for a global ban on these additives. “Many of these chemicals are dumped, burned, and leached into our waters, into our sacred lands,” Orona said. “We cannot talk about justice if these harms continue.”

A Just Transition Rooted in Indigenous Knowledge

While many governments are pushing for ambitious production caps and bans on single-use plastics, Orona warned that these measures must not shift the burden onto those least responsible for the crisis.

“A just transition means phasing out fossil fuel-based plastics while investing in community-led solutions, including Indigenous knowledge and science,” he said. “This isn’t just about cleaning up trash; it’s about restoring balance and protecting future generations.”

In a system long dominated by fossil fuel interests and extractive economies, Indigenous communities have often led the way in conservation and sustainable living. “Our knowledge systems are not just cultural—they are scientific. They are proven. And they are part of the solution,” Orona noted.

Follow the Money—and Ensure It Reaches the Frontlines

Orona’s final message was financial. Any treaty, he insisted, must include a mechanism that guarantees direct access to funds for Indigenous and frontline communities.

“Too often, we are shut out of global financing streams—even when we are the ones on the front lines, creating the very solutions the world needs,” he said. “That must end.”

While images of floating plastic bottles and entangled turtles often dominate headlines, experts at the Nice panel were adamant: the crisis begins long before a straw hits the ocean.

Disproportionate Impacts

Plastic production facilities are often located in marginalized communities—adding a layer of environmental injustice to the crisis.

“Indigenous peoples, rural communities, and minority populations suffer the worst impacts,” said Orona. “We’re talking about asthma, cancers, and cardiovascular diseases—especially in children. These are not abstract consequences; these are lived experiences.”

Reporters on the Panda Boat scribbled notes between bites of Mediterranean pastries, visibly moved by Orona’s personal account.

“This is genocide by pollution,” he added. “Our people are dying, and it’s largely invisible to the rest of the world.”

Wildlife at Risk

The panel also underscored the devastating effects of plastic on marine life. Every species of sea turtle has been documented ingesting or getting entangled in plastic. For blue whales, the planet’s largest animals, the reality is even more daunting—they are believed to ingest up to 10 million pieces of microplastic every day, sometimes weighing as much as 44 kilograms.

The next round of negotiations for the plastics treaty is scheduled for August in Geneva, where pressure is mounting to solidify a legally binding agreement that includes all five critical points outlined in the Nice declaration.

The sense of urgency also echoes in the corridors of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the U.N. agency overseeing the global shipping industry. Tasked with ensuring environmental safety on the high seas, the IMO has stepped up efforts to address plastic waste, among other pressing marine threats.

In response to a question about the devastating 2021 marine spill in Sri Lanka—where a burning cargo vessel released over 1,680 metric tons of plastic pellets into the Indian Ocean—IMO Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez noted that the agency has been developing new regulations specifically targeting the handling, packaging, and cleanup of plastic pellets. These measures, initially adopted by the European Union, mark a significant step in tightening maritime controls on plastic pollution.

Dominguez stressed that tackling marine pollution also demands inclusive governance. The IMO is increasingly encouraging the participation of Indigenous communities and young people—groups historically sidelined from international maritime decision-making. Their voices, he said, are crucial for shaping policies that are both just and effective.

Next Steps

Professor Bethany Carney Almroth—a renowned environmental toxicologist and one of the leading scientific voices in the negotiations—believes the business world is not the obstacle many assume it to be. Instead, she says, it’s a matter of giving business the legal clarity to act.

“Business follows the rule of law,” she said. “The situation we have today is a mix—some laws are written, others are absent. That’s the problem. If we create new regulations, then it’s no longer a question of whether businesses are voluntarily doing enough. It becomes a question of compliance.”

Carney Almroth, who has worked extensively on the science-policy interface for chemicals and plastics, said that a strong, enforceable treaty is essential to shift the status quo.

“The status quo is broken,” she said plainly. “We need to change the framework so regulations guide businesses to do the best thing possible—for the economy, for the environment, and for people.”

As one of the few experts who has consistently called for systemic reform in how plastics are managed, Carney Almroth said that relying on voluntary industry movements is simply not enough.

“We’ve seen global treaties deliver meaningful results before,” she said. “The Montreal Protocol worked. It changed how we handled chlorofluorocarbons, and it protected the ozone layer. People may not even realize how much their lives have improved because of those decisions—but they have.”

The Hidden Cost of Profit

Responding to a question about the profitability of the plastics industry—especially in countries where it contributes significantly to government revenues—Carney Almroth offered a sobering perspective.

“When we say plastics are profitable, that’s only because we’re not accounting for the real costs,” she said. “Those costs aren’t paid by the companies producing plastics. They’re paid by nature, and they’re paid by people.”

She cited staggering health implications, pointing out that plastics contain thousands of chemicals—many of which are toxic, carcinogenic, or endocrine-disrupting. “The human healthcare costs associated with exposure to these chemicals are astronomical—running into billions of dollars each year. But they’re not included in the price tag of plastic production.”

Building Standards that Protect People and the Planet

So what does it take to eliminate hazardous plastics from global markets?

According to Carney Almroth, we’re still missing a critical piece: effective, fit-for-purpose international standards.

“Right now, most of the existing standards—developed by organizations like ISO or OECD—are geared toward material quality or industrial use. They were never designed to protect human health or the environment,” she explained. “We need new standards. Ones that are developed by independent experts and shielded from vested interests.”

For such standards to be truly effective, she said, they must be holistic and interdisciplinary. “We need to move away from just focusing on economic sustainability. That’s what we’ve done in the past—and it’s failed us. Environmental and social sustainability must be given equal weight.”

As the panel wrapped up, Orona gazed over the Port Lympia waters.

“We have a choice right now,” he said. “To continue poisoning the womb of the Earth—or to become caretakers, protectors.”

And as the reporters descended the gangway of the Panda Boat, the symbolism was not lost: we’re all adrift in this ocean of plastic. Whether we sink or swim depends on what happens next.

• reposted from Inter Press Service

Nearly 100 countries at the United Nations Ocean Conference on Tuesday issued a joint declaration demanding a bold global plastics treaty ahead of the next round of negotiations—a call that civil society groups welcomed, while also stressing that any strong language must be followed by similar action.

The “Nice Wake-Up Call for an Ambitious Plastics Treaty,” named for the French coastal city hosting this week’s U.N. summit, says that “we are heartened by the constructive engagement of the majority of Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) members to conclude an effective treaty that is urgently needed, acknowledging the scale of socioeconomic challenges that ending plastic pollution may represent for certain parties.”

The declaration focuses on five key points for the next talks, INC-5.2, scheduled for August 5-14 in Geneva, Switzerland:

• We recognize that addressing the increasing and unsustainable levels of production and consumption of plastics is essential;
• We call for a legally binding obligation to phase out the most problematic plastic products and chemicals of concern in plastic products;
• We emphasize the importance of a binding obligation to improve the design of plastic products and ensure they cause minimum environmental impact and safeguard human health;
• We recognize the need for effective means of implementation and accessible, new, and additional financing, noting the special circumstances of least developed countries and small island developing states; and
• We call for an effective and ambitious treaty that can evolve over time and is responsive to changes in emerging evidence and knowledge.

“A treaty that lacks these elements, only relies on voluntary measures, or does not address the full lifecycle of plastics will not be effective to deal with the challenge of plastic pollution,” warns the declaration, backed by the European Union and countries including Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Barbados, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Iceland, Madagascar, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Switzerland, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, and Vanuatu.

Erin Simon, vice president for plastic waste and business at World Wildlife Fund (WWF), said Tuesday that the statement “sends a positive signal that there is strong collaboration and support to secure a legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution.”

“These are the types of priorities we’re hopeful will be included in a final treaty,” Simon noted. “Millions of people around the world have called for a solution to the plastic pollution crisis and while today is a step in the right direction we must continue to push toward advancing a meaningful and enduring agreement in Geneva.”

Graham Forbes, Greenpeace USA’s global plastics campaign lead and head of the group’s delegation for the treaty talks, said that “the Nice declaration, signed by an overwhelming majority of countries, is the wake-up call the world needs. Governments are finally saying the quiet part out loud: We cannot end plastic pollution without cutting plastic production. Full stop.”

Forbes continued:

The Nice Declaration tackles the root cause of the crisis, which is the ever-growing, reckless production of plastics driven by fossil fuel giants. The message to industry lobbyists is loud and clear: The health of our children is more important than your bottom line.

We welcome the call for a legally binding global cap on plastic production, and real rules to phase out the most toxic plastic products and chemicals. For too long, treaty talks have been stuck in circular conversations while plastic pollution chokes our oceans, poisons our bodies, and fuels the climate crisis.

But this statement only matters if countries back it up with action this August in Geneva at INC-5.2. That means no voluntary nonsense, no loopholes, and no surrender to fossil fuel and petrochemical interests. We need a treaty with teeth—one that slashes plastic production, holds polluters accountable, and protects people on the frontlines.

Greenpeace and WWF’s global groups are part of a coalition of over 230 civil society organizations and rights holders focused on the plastics treaty—which responded to the new declaration by emphasizing that it must be a “floor, not a ceiling.”

“The Nice declaration is a welcome step, but words must be followed with actions if we are serious about protecting the rights and health of all. Member states must show decisive leadership at INC-5.2 and deliver a strong, legally binding plastics treaty that leaves no one behind,” said Juressa Lee, co-chair of the International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Plastics, a coalition member.

“Communities on the frontlines, including Indigenous Peoples, are bearing the brunt of plastic pollution at every stage of its toxic lifecycle: from oil and gas extraction, to plastic production, to waste dumping, and the challenging process of environmental remediation, including the restoration of contaminated sites and the recognition of those who have protected these oceans and territories for millennia,” Lee added. “We need action, not delay, to safeguard the ocean and the communities that depend on them.”

• reposted from Common Dreams

Agricultural soil is now the most polluted plastic sink on the planet, surpassing even the oceans in concentration of microplastic particles. According to a comprehensive study published in Environmental Sciences Europe and led by Murdoch University Ph.D. candidate Joseph Boctor, soil used to grow food can contain up to 23 times more microplastics than are found in ocean waters. The discovery underscores an escalating environmental and public health crisis, as the contamination moves invisibly through ecosystems and food systems—and into the human body.

“These microplastics are turning food-producing land into a plastic sink,” Boctor stated. Unlike bottles and bags that are visibly discarded, microplastics are microscopic and easy to overlook. But their chemical complexity may reshape how we understand farming, food safety, and health.

The review explored how microplastics and nanoplastics infiltrate the soil, how they interact with plants, and how they ultimately impact human health. The findings are disturbing: these tiny particles are not inert. They interfere with soil fertility, damage crops, carry toxic additives, and have been detected in nearly every kind of food—including fruits, vegetables, seafood, and dairy.

Plastic finds its way into soil through multiple channels. On farms, the largest contributor is plastic mulch film, which is used to control weeds and improve yields. Other sources include silage wrapping, irrigation tubing, seed coatings, and pesticide containers. Off the farm, sewage sludge fertilizers, runoff, and airborne plastic particles deposit pollution across agricultural landscapes. In some industrialized areas, soil concentrations exceed 200,000 particles per kilogram.

The contamination is global. The study compiled data from over 30 countries, finding pollution across agricultural zones in Europe, Asia, and beyond. Once in the soil, the microplastics don’t remain static. They move into crops—first through the roots, especially via pores or biological processes like endocytosis. In some cases, they are absorbed through leaves and transported down into root systems. No part of the plant is entirely safe.

This plastic intrusion has already been documented in key crops. Research cited in the review confirms the presence of plastic particles in lettuce, carrots, wheat, apples, and pears. In peanuts, microplastics were found to cause a 35 percent reduction in nitrogen uptake—a crucial nutrient for plant health and crop productivity.

But it’s not just the physical presence of plastic that poses a threat. These particles act as carriers for chemical additives—up to 10,000 of them—many of which remain unregulated in agricultural contexts. “And BPA-free does not equal risk free,” Boctor clarified. Plastics labeled as BPA-free often contain substitute chemicals like BPF and BPS, which have been shown to cause similar or even worse endocrine disruption. These additives interfere with the body’s hormonal balance, affecting everything from metabolism to fertility.

Soil contaminated with microplastics becomes chemically unstable. Plastic particles interfere with the cycling of nitrogen and carbon, reduce microbial diversity, and lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions like methane and carbon dioxide. Over time, this degrades soil quality, slows crop growth, and reduces nutritional value. To compensate, farmers often turn to synthetic fertilizers, which introduce yet another layer of chemical exposure and environmental strain.

Even bioplastics are not exempt from scrutiny. Promoted as eco-friendly alternatives, some bioplastics such as PLA and PBAT still reduce plant growth and disrupt microbial communities. “Greener” does not always mean safe, and Boctor’s team cautions against blind reliance on bioplastics as a solution.

Still, they are exploring safer alternatives. The Smart Sprays Project, a collaboration between Murdoch University and Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), is developing a bioplastic-based spray that acts as a non-toxic water barrier. It reduces evaporation, helps retain rainwater, and is compatible with existing farm equipment.

Plastic pollution also affects the ecosystems beneath the soil. Earthworms exposed to microplastics exhibit stunted growth, impaired reproduction, and internal damage. Insects like springtails avoid contaminated soil and fail to reproduce. Once the microbial balance in soil is disrupted, it becomes difficult—if not impossible—to restore.

The consequences extend far beyond the farm. Microplastics have been found in nearly every category of food: fruits, vegetables, meat, milk, and seafood. According to the review, apples can contain as many as 233,000 plastic particles per gram. Adults may unknowingly ingest more than five grams of plastic each week—the weight of a credit card.

This plastic does not simply pass through the human body. Researchers have discovered plastic particles embedded in the bloodstream, lungs, heart, semen, placenta, and even arterial plaque. “This makes the plastic crisis unchecked, and human health exposed,” Boctor said.

Despite the mounting evidence, global regulation remains minimal. There are no binding national or international limits on microplastic concentrations in soil or food. Laboratory studies used to assess toxicity often rely on unrealistic plastic concentrations, masking the real-world threat. These studies frequently ignore how additives and environmental conditions interact to increase toxicity over time.

Even regions with some oversight fall short. The European Union has placed limited restrictions on BPA use, but most plastic additives escape regulation. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration has not revised its BPA guidelines since 2013, and agricultural plastics remain largely ungoverned.

Boctor’s review exposes not just a scientific crisis but a systemic failure of regulation. “This review highlights the urgent need for coordinated scientific and regulatory efforts,” he said. “Regulators, scientists and industry must collaborate to close the loopholes before plastic pollution further entrenches itself in the global food chain.”

As the study warns, the choices made today will determine whether future generations inherit healthy farmland—or landscapes poisoned by the very materials once thought to help them grow. The soil is the foundation of life. Its silent contamination is no longer invisible—and can no longer be ignored.

• from Nation of Change

Despite progress, negotiations stalled at the end of 2024 due to diverging views on the scope, measures, financing, responsibilities and other issues. This impasse highlighted the challenge of balancing economic interests, development disparities, and planetary sustainability.

As 2025 begins, it brings with it a renewed sense of purpose and the opportunity to gather fresh energy for the critical task ahead. The turning of the calendar offers the global community a chance to reset, reimagine, and reignite the momentum needed to achieve a plastics treaty that meets the scale of the crisis.

Winston Churchill’s words; “Kites rise highest against the wind, not with it,” remind us that resilience and determination can turn obstacles into opportunities. Despite the headwinds, this treaty holds the promise to drive systemic change, protect our planet, and secure a sustainable future for all.

Sulan Chen Life is short, art is long

A global plastics treaty is not just a policy document—it is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape humanity’s relationship with plastics and redefine our stewardship of the planet. To achieve this, we need bold global leadership that rises above short-term interests and embraces a vision of shared prosperity for generations to come.

Continuing the current trajectory of linear production, consumption and disposal systems will leave an indelible mark on the planet—a legacy of pollution, environmental degradation, and missed opportunities for innovation. It is a legacy that future generations will inherit, one that we have the power to prevent.

The treaty must drive us toward a more sustainable and conscientious path, where plastics are not just reduced but reimagined within circular economies, balancing economic growth with environmental responsibility.

As we navigate this critical juncture, it is worth reflecting on the timeless wisdom of Hippocrates: “Life is short, art is long.” Our lives and leadership are fleeting, but the decisions we make today will ripple far into the future, shaping the lives of generations to come.

This treaty, if crafted with courage and foresight, can stand as a testament to human ingenuity and unity. Let us choose to leave a legacy that embodies regeneration, not regret.

Rising against the winds

The path to a global plastics treaty is not without its obstacles. Divergent perspectives, economic dependencies, and varying levels of development among nations often create friction.

However, these winds of resistance should not be seen as insurmountable barriers but rather as opportunities to soar higher. Difficult moments like these demand vision, courage, and collaboration to find common ground.

This is the moment for global leadership to rise above narrow self-interest and short-term gains to embrace the transformative potential of this treaty. Bold compromises and courageous decisions are needed to prioritize the long-term health of our planet and its people. Leaders must consider the far-reaching impact of their actions on ecosystems, human health, and global stability.

The success of this treaty will hinge on our ability to navigate these challenges together. It requires that countries approach the negotiations with a sense of shared purpose, recognizing that plastic pollution transcends borders. With determination and collective action, we can turn resistance into momentum, obstacles into opportunities, and agreements into tangible change.

A call to action

The urgency of finalizing a robust and enforceable global plastics treaty by 2025 cannot be overstated. The world cannot afford further delays. With every passing moment, the problem grows more complex and costlier to address.

To the negotiators, leaders, and advocates shaping this treaty: Let the kite of ambition fly high. Rise above immediate obstacles, chart the course for systemic change, and seize this historic opportunity to leave a legacy of resilience and regeneration.

As we approach the pivotal milestones of 2024 and 2025, let us draw inspiration from history, where humanity has risen above divisions to achieve transformative milestones, such as the Montreal Protocol, which safeguarded the ozone layer, and the Paris Agreement, which united nations against climate change.

These successes remind us that strength, unity, and vision can overcome even the most daunting challenges. Together, we can channel this spirit of international cooperation to turn the tide on plastic pollution and ensure a cleaner, healthier, and more sustainable planet for generations to come.

Sulan Chen is Principal Technical Advisor and Global Lead on Plastics Offer, UNDP.

From IPS News

Staff Writer for Wake Up World

Microplastics, the tiny particles shed from clothing, packaging, and other plastic products, have infiltrated our food chain. A study by researchers at Portland State University (PSU) revealed how widespread this contamination is in seafood. Their findings, published in Frontiers in Toxicology, underscore the urgent need for solutions to curb microfiber pollution and protect both marine ecosystems and human health.

What Are Microplastics and How Do They Enter Our Food Chain?

Microplastics are small plastic particles, often invisible to the naked eye, that result from the breakdown of larger plastic items or are directly manufactured as microbeads. These particles enter marine ecosystems through wastewater, stormwater runoff, and improper disposal of plastic waste.

Once in the water, microplastics are ingested by marine organisms at all levels of the food chain. From zooplankton to shrimp and fish, these particles accumulate in tissues, eventually making their way onto our plates.

As Elise Granek, professor of environmental science at PSU, explains, “What we put out into the environment ends up back on our plates.”

Key Findings of the Study

The PSU research team, led by Summer Traylor and Marilyn Duncan, analyzed six species of seafood that are economically and culturally significant in Oregon:

• Black rockfish
• Lingcod
• Chinook salmon
• Pacific herring
• Pacific lamprey
• Pink shrimp

Among the 182 samples tested, 1,806 suspected microplastic particles were found in edible tissues. Fibers were the most common type of particle, followed by fragments and films.

Shrimp at the Greatest Risk

Pink shrimp, which filter-feed near the water’s surface, exhibited the highest concentration of microplastics. This is likely because shrimp feed on zooplankton, which often gather in areas where microplastics accumulate.

Granek noted, “Shrimp and small fish, like herring, eat smaller food items like zooplankton. Other studies have found high concentrations of plastics in the area in which zooplankton accumulate.”

Unexpected Insights from Processing

Interestingly, the study found that plastic contamination introduced during seafood processing was not universal. Simple rinsing of fish fillets and shrimp, as done at home, removed some of the particles that may have landed on the surface during handling.

Implications for Human Health

One alarming finding from the study is the potential for microplastics to translocate from the gut to muscle tissues, which are the parts humans consume.

Susanne Brander, an ecotoxicologist from Oregon State University, highlighted the implications: “It’s very concerning that microfibers appear to move from the gut into other tissues such as muscle. This has wide implications for other organisms, potentially including humans too.”

Microplastics are not only found in seafood. They’ve been detected in bottled water, honey, beer, and even plant-based foods like veggie burgers and tofu. This pervasive presence raises concerns about the long-term health impacts of microplastic ingestion.

Seeking Solutions: Reducing Microplastic Pollution

The study’s findings have spurred researchers to focus on innovative solutions to mitigate microplastic pollution. Granek’s lab is spearheading several projects:

1. Filtration Systems: A $1.9 million NOAA-funded project is testing filters for washing machines, dishwashers, and dryers to capture microplastics before they enter wastewater systems.
2. Stormwater Catch Basin Filters: Funded by Oregon Sea Grant, these filters are being installed in coastal towns to trap microplastics from road runoff.

These technologies aim to address the issue at its source, preventing microplastics from reaching waterways and, ultimately, our food chain.

What You Can Do to Reduce Microplastic Pollution

While large-scale solutions are in development, individuals can take practical steps to reduce microplastic pollution and protect marine ecosystems:

1. Wash Smart

• Use a microfiber filter or bag in your washing machine to capture fibers shed from synthetic clothing.
• Wash clothes in cold water and air-dry when possible to minimize shedding.

2. Choose Sustainable Products

• Opt for natural fibers like cotton, wool, or hemp instead of synthetic materials like polyester and nylon.
• Reduce single-use plastics by using reusable bags, bottles, and utensils.

3. Support Policy Changes

• Advocate for policies that regulate microplastic pollution and promote sustainable practices.
• Support local efforts to install stormwater filters and other pollution-control measures.

4. Stay Informed

• Learn more about microplastic pollution and share information with your community.
• Support research initiatives focused on understanding and mitigating the effects of microplastics.

The Takeaway: A Shared Responsibility

The PSU study highlights a harsh reality: microplastics are everywhere, including the seafood we eat. Yet, it also offers hope through innovative research and actionable solutions. By making conscious choices in our daily lives and supporting broader efforts to reduce plastic pollution, we can help protect our oceans and health.

As Granek reminds us, “If we are disposing of and utilizing products that release microplastics, those microplastics make their way into the environment.” It’s time to break this cycle—for the sake of our planet and future generations.

• from Wake Up World