Jie and I had been hoping to identify naturally occurring whitening pigments that could be used in paper and paints. The beetle’s white exoskeleton is made from a compound called chitin, which is a type of carbohydrate – one that is also commonly found in crab and lobster shells. 

First, Jie extracted chitin nanofibers from crab shells obtained from food waste that are chemically the same as those found in the white beetles. But instead of creating a white material as intended, Jie produced dense, transparent films. The nanofibers more readily assembled in tightly packed films than in the porous structures Jie desired.

On a whim, Jie measured the rate at which oxygen passed through the film. The result was astonishing: The barrier allowed less oxygen through than many existing packaging plastics. 

That serendipitous finding in 2014 shifted my team of engineering students’ focus from color to packaging. We asked whether natural materials could rival the performance of common plastics. In the years since, our team has used this discovery to create biodegradable films that offer a more sustainable and effective alternative to plastic packaging.

Challenges of plastic packaging

Plastic packaging is commonly used to protect food, pharmaceuticals and personal care products. These plastics keep out moisture and oxygen from the air, so products stay fresh and safe. 

Most packaging has several layers that work together to keep air out, but these layers hinder reuse and recycling efforts. As a result, most of this plastic barrier packaging is discarded to landfills as single-use materials. 

Many researchers have sought alternatives that are renewable, biodegradable or recyclable, yet just as effective. At Georgia Tech, my team of students and post-docs has spent more than a decade tackling this problem. This journey began with that beetle.

Building a better barrier

Chitin is widely available in food waste and mushrooms, and it is used in products such as water filters and wound dressing. However, our early attempts to scale up the film technology based on the beetle-inspired experiment failed. 

In 2018, the team made an important leap forward by using spray coating to create layers of chitin and cellulose nanomaterials. Cellulose, like chitin, is a carbohydrate polymer – a chain of repeating carbohydrate units – and it is obtained from plants. These abundant natural materials have opposite electric charges, which led to better barrier performance when we combined them than either material alone. 

In this approach, the team sprayed down a layer of chitin, followed by a layer of cellulose. The opposite charges between the chitin and cellulose created a long-range attraction between them that binds the layers to create a dense interface.

Later, in collaboration with Meisha Shofner, a materials scientist, and Tequila Harris, a mechanical engineer, other students showed these coatings could be applied with scalable, roll-to-roll techniques. Roll-to-roll coating methods are preferred in industry because the coatings are applied continuously to large rolls of a substrate material, such as paper or other biodegradable plastics. 

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EBNyjJFB8Zc?wmode=transparent&start=0Roll-to-roll coating allows manufacturers to easily apply thin layers of coating to a base material, called a substrate.

Still, humidity posed a major challenge, limiting any real-world applications. Moisture swelled the film, allowing more oxygen to sneak through. 

Then came another breakthrough. In 2024, another collaborator, Natalie Stingelin, and I discovered that two common food components resisted water vapor when combined: carboxymethylcellulose – which is found in ice cream, for example – and citric acid. 

The result was a film that hindered the transmission of moisture. The citric acid reacted with the cellulose to form cross-links, which are chemical junctions that bind the cellulose molecules. Once bound, they reduced the film’s moisture uptake.

We integrated this new discovery with the prior work by combining the citric acid and cellulose, and then casting this mixture as a freestanding film by coating it onto a substrate, such as chitin.

However, that formulation did not have strong oxygen barrier properties because it did not contain the highly crystalline cellulose nanomaterials from our first film. Our team’s most recent achievement, from October 2025, combines the above innovations. As a result, we’ve created a bio-based film that is an excellent barrier to both oxygen and moisture. 

Scaling up production

When cast into thin films, these components self-organize into a dense structure that resists swelling with water vapor. Tests showed that even at 80% humidity the film matched or outperformed common packaging plastics. 

The materials are renewable, biodegradable and compostable. Our team has filed several patent applications, and we are working with industry partners to develop specific packaging uses.

One challenge that applications face is a limited supply of the bio-based components compared to the high volume of conventional plastics. Like any new material, it would take time for manufacturers to develop supply chains as the films begin to be used. 

For example, the market demand for purified chitin is small right now, as it is used in niche applications, such as wound dressings and water filtration. Due to its variety of uses, packaging could increase that market demand. 

The next challenge is scaling up from experimental films to industrial production, which would likely take several years. The team is exploring roll-to-roll coating techniques and working with industry partners to integrate these materials into existing packaging lines. 

Policy and consumer demand will also play a role. As governments push for bans on single-use plastics and companies set sustainability targets, bio-based films could become part of the solution. 

The story of this breakthrough reminds me that science often advances through unexpected results. From a failed attempt to mimic a beetle’s color to a promising alternative to plastic, this research shows how curiosity can lead to solutions for some of our biggest challenges.

• from The Conversation

More than half the trash polluting America’s national parks and federal lands contains hazardous microplastics, according to a waste audit published Thursday.

As part of its annual “TrashBlitz” effort to document the scale of plastic pollution in national parks and federal lands across the US, volunteers with the 5 Gyres Institute collected nearly 24,000 pieces of garbage at 59 federally protected locations.

Report Shows How Recycling Is Largely a ‘Toxic Lie’ Pushed by Plastics Industry

Trump DOJ Sides With Roundup Manufacturer Over Cancer Victims in Supreme Court Case

In each of the four years the group has done the audit, they’ve found that plastic has made up the vast majority of trash in the sites.

They found that, again this year, plastic made up 85% of the waste they logged, with 25% of it single-use plastics like bottle caps, food wrappers, bags, and cups.

But for the first time, they also broke down the plastics category to account for microplastics, the small fragments that can lodge permanently in the human body and cause numerous harmful health effects.

As a Stanford University report from January 2025 explained:

In the past year alone, headlines have sounded the alarm about particles in tea bags, seafood, meat, and bottled water. Scientists have estimated that adults ingest the equivalent of one credit card per week in microplastics. Studies in animals and human cells suggest microplastics exposure could be linked to cancer, heart attacks, reproductive problems, and a host of other harms.

Microplastics come in two main forms: pre-production plastic pellets, sometimes known as “nurdles,” which are melted down to make other products; and fragments of larger plastic items that break down over time.

The volunteers found that microplastic pellets and fragments made up more than half the trash they found over the course of their survey.

“Even in landscapes that appeared untouched, a closer look at trails, riverbeds, and coastlines revealed thousands of plastic pellets and fragments that pose a clear threat to the environment, wildlife, and human health,” said Nick Kemble, programs manager at the 5 Gyres Institute.

Most of the microplastics they found came in the form of pellets, which the group’s report notes often “spill in transit from boats and trains, entering waterways that carry them further into the environment or deposit them on shorelines.”

The surveyors identified the Altria Group—a leading manufacturer of cigarettes—PepsiCo, Anheuser-Busch InBev, the Coca-Cola Company, and Mars as the top corporate polluters whose names appeared on branded trash.

But the vast majority of microplastic waste discovered was unbranded. According to the Coastal & Estuarine Research Federation, petrochemical companies such as Dow, ExxonMobil, Shell, and Formosa are among the leading manufacturers of pellets found strewn across America’s bodies of water.

The 5 Gyres report notes that “at the federal level in the United States, there is no comprehensive regulatory framework that specifically holds these polluters accountable, resulting in widespread pollution that threatens ecosystems and wildlife.”

The group called on Congress to pass the Reducing Waste in National Parks Act, introduced in 2023 by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), which would reduce the sale of single-use plastics in national parks. It also advocated for the Plastic Pellet Free Waters Act, introduced last year by Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) and then-Rep. Mary Peltola (D-Alaska), which would prohibit the discharge of pre-production plastic pellets into waterways, storm drains, and sewers.

“It’s time that our elected officials act on the warnings we’ve raised for years—single-use plastics and microplastics pose an immediate threat to our environment and public health,” said Paulita Bennett-Martin, senior strategist of policy initiatives at 5 Gyres. “TrashBlitz volunteers uncovered thousands of microplastics in our nation’s most protected spaces, and we’re urging decisive action that addresses this issue at the source.”

-from Common Dreams

Contrary to some reporting, the United Nations Global Plastics Treaty hasn’t failed—but recent talks in Geneva are a blaring wake-up call. If we don’t get this right, human health will suffer for generations, and our climate goals will slip further behind. It is vital that plastics, and the treaty, continue to be a priority in international fora.

Despite 99% of plastics being made from fossil fuel and plastic production projected to triple by 2060, plastics were low on the global agenda at the recently concluded COP30 climate summit. Countries will soon be reconvening at the UN Environmental Assembly (UNEA-7) to confront the world’s biggest environmental problems, presenting another opportunity to restore momentum and align global action on the detrimental environmental, health, and economic impacts of the plastics crisis.

Report Shows How Recycling Is Largely a ‘Toxic Lie’ Pushed by Plastics Industry

As America Faces a Caregiving Catastrophe, We Need to Name the Real Villains

Microplastics are now in even the most remote places on the planet and found throughout human bodies. Thousands of chemicals in plastics have been linked to immune system disorders, hormone imbalances, diabetes, obesity, cancer, and infertility, costing an estimated $1.5 trillion in health-related economic losses every year worldwide.

Despite efforts by countries to delay progress at INC 5.2 in August, high-ambition countries succeeded in rejecting a weak deal that failed to protect people and the planet, recognizing it would do more harm than good and take decades to fix. The talks aren’t over: The chance to deliver a treaty that helps to end the plastic pollution crisis is still on the table. Ambitious countries have yet to use all the tools at their disposal, including voting, to secure real progress.

Stalled by Design

The treaty talks haven’t failed, but deep flaws in the process remain. Countries with heavy fossil fuel interests, or “petrostates”—and the lobbyists backing them—are deliberately delaying progress to protect profits. An estimated 234 fossil fuel, petrochemical, and plastics industry lobbyists flooded the Geneva talks, with some even embedded in country delegations. Their goal is for a toothless treaty—one primarily focused on waste management, with voluntary commitments—or for the process to collapse entirely to safeguard business as usual.

Ambitious countries pushed back, rejecting two watered-down proposals in Geneva that would have created exactly that kind of weak agreement, instead of scaling down plastic production. Most plastic can’t and won’t ever be recycled, but ends up landfilled, incinerated, and polluting our communities and environment.

If we want meaningful climate action, we can’t ignore plastic production.

Despite most countries supporting an agreement that curbs plastic production, bans toxic chemicals, and protects human health, a handful of petrostates have blocked such commonsense provisions under the guise of reaching consensus. While consensus may seem ideal, it gives single countries the power to veto widely supported texts and stand in the way of progress. Meanwhile, participation for Indigenous Peoples, scientists, and public interest nonprofits has not lived up to the promise of an open and transparent process.

These dynamics mirror the long delays that have plagued climate action under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change for decades. The plastics industry now heats the world four times more than air travel, and serves as a “Plan B” for fossil fuel companies, letting them protect profits, expand markets, and drive more fossil fuel use. If we want meaningful climate action, we can’t ignore plastic production. That makes a strong, legally binding plastics treaty more urgent than ever.

Path Forward

UN member states must act rather than continue negotiating in circles. With the recent resignation of the chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC), 166 members of Civil Society have sent a letter to member states calling for the new chair, when elected, to fix the process. The next chair must ensure the voices of those harmed first and the worst by plastics—from fossil fuel extraction and plastic production to incineration, landfills, and pollution—are heard.

Countries still have a chance to get the treaty process back on track. The plastics crisis is an all-hands-on-deck moment, requiring governments all around the world to respond at the local, national, regional, and international levels. We are already making progress at the international level, as demonstrated with a groundbreaking resolution at the recent International Union for Conservation of Nature. We need to see more of these kinds of actions, not less.

After all, it was at UNEA-5.2 in 2022 that countries first agreed to negotiate a global plastics treaty.

We cannot afford a weak deal. Ambitious countries must exercise their power to call for a vote when low-ambition petrostates weaponize consensus.

If world leaders fix the process and keep ambition high, a treaty that puts people and the planet before plastics and profits is within reach.

• from Common Dreams. https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/hope-plastics-treaty

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

Plastic pollution in the ocean has long been a visible crisis, with images of bags, bottles, and nets entangling marine life. But new research reveals that the most widespread form of plastic pollution may be the kind that cannot be seen.

A study published in Nature on Wednesday estimates that the North Atlantic Ocean alone contains 27 million metric tons of nanoplastic—plastic particles 100 times smaller than the width of a human hair. According to the study’s authors, that figure is 10 times higher than previous estimates of plastic pollution of all sizes across all the world’s oceans.

Researchers from the Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research (UFZ), Utrecht University, and the Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research conducted the study, marking one of the first attempts to quantify marine nanoplastic pollution. Nanoplastics, defined as plastic particles less than 1 micrometer in size, were found to be present at all depths sampled, from surface waters to near the ocean floor.

“Plastic pollution of the marine realm is widespread, with most scientific attention given to macroplastics and microplastics. By contrast, ocean nanoplastics (<1 μm) remain largely unquantified, leaving gaps in our understanding of the mass budget of this plastic size class,” the authors of the study wrote. “Our findings suggest that nanoplastics comprise the dominant fraction of marine plastic pollution.”

The team collected samples during a 2020 research cruise aboard the RV Pelagia, sampling 12 locations across the North Atlantic at three depths: 10 meters below the surface, 1,000 meters deep, and 30 meters above the seafloor. They analyzed samples using thermal desorption and a high-resolution proton transfer reaction mass spectrometer (PTR-MS), combusting the nanoplastics to identify the gases released.

Lead author Dr. Dušan Materić, who developed the method at Utrecht University, explained that “each polymer has a unique chemical fingerprint by which both its concentration and identity can be determined.”

The analysis identified three primary types of nanoplastics. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET), used in plastic bottles and textiles, was the most widespread at every depth. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC), common in pipes, upholstery, and children’s toys, was also found, as was polystyrene (PS), used in plastic foam products.

At almost all measuring points, these types of plastic were detected in the uppermost layer of the ocean. “This is because, on the one hand, the redistribution from the atmosphere occurs via the sea surface and, on the other hand, a lot of plastic is introduced via the estuaries of rivers,” Materić explained.

Concentrations were highest closer to the surface, at 18 milligrams per square meter, and lowest near the seafloor, at about 5.5 milligrams per square meter. The lowest nanoplastic concentrations were found near the sea floor, but PET nanoplastics were detected at all points measured there, even at depths below 4,500 meters.

“They are present everywhere in such large quantities that we can no longer neglect them ecologically,” Materić said.

Notably, the study did not detect polyethylene (PE) or polypropylene (PP), the world’s two most common plastic polymers, likely due to limitations of the detection method. As a result, the researchers believe their estimate is conservative.

“This is in the same order of magnitude as the estimated mass of macro- and microplastics for the entire Atlantic,” Materić said.

Until now, quantitative data on nanoplastics in the world’s ocean was scarce. “Only a couple of years ago, there was still debate over whether nanoplastic even exists. Many scholars continue to believe that nanoplastics are thermodynamically unlikely to persist in nature, as their formation requires high energy. Our findings show that, by mass, the amount of nanoplastic is comparable to what was previously found for macro- and microplastic—at least in this ocean system,” Materić said.

The potential ecological and human health impacts of nanoplastics are profound. Due to their tiny size, nanoplastics can cross biological membranes more easily than microplastics, potentially leading to greater health risks. Studies suggest that nanoplastics cause inflammation to living cells when ingested, though it is unclear whether this is due to the particles themselves, chemicals they release, or pathogens they carry.

Tracey Woodruff, a professor of reproductive health and the environment at the University of California, San Francisco, who was not involved in the research, said she expects nanoplastics will be linked to many of the same health risks as microplastics. In animals, these include reproductive issues, intestinal problems, and colon and lung cancer. She warned, “Our hypothesis is that … nanoplastics could travel more widely in the body even than microplastics, and therefore could have more adverse health consequences.”

Helge Niemann, a researcher at the Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research and co-author of the study, stated nanoplastics are “not conducive, generally, for life.”

Martin Wagner, a biology professor at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology who was not involved in the study, said: “I would argue as a toxicologist that if you see something in micrograms per liter in the open ocean, that’s quite a high concentration.”

He cautioned, however, that the estimate relies on “very few samples,” but added, “It does make sense that you would find more nanoplastics than macro and microplastics.”

According to the United Nations, roughly 20 million tons of plastic enter aquatic ecosystems each year, much of which ends up in oceans.

“We’ve basically been dumping plastic in the ocean for decades,” Woodruff said. “It doesn’t go away, it just breaks down into smaller plastics, so it does make sense that you would find more nanoplastics than macro and microplastics.”

The findings have implications for upcoming UN plastics treaty negotiations, where world leaders will debate measures to address plastic pollution. Woodruff emphasized, “This reinforces how important it is to cap [plastic production], leave fossil fuels in the ground, and look to alternatives.”

• from Nation of Change

“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

Industrial hemp isn’t just a crop—it’s an emerging cornerstone in the shift toward bio-based manufacturing. With its versatile applications and growing market potential, hemp is proving to be a valuable input in the production of bioplastics that are stronger, cleaner, and better aligned with the goals of a circular economy.

At the National Hemp Association (NHA), we’ve long supported the development of domestic supply chains for hemp fiber and hurd. Now, that investment is taking on new relevance in the bioplastics sector—especially as U.S. companies push to innovate with natural fillers and improve the performance of bio-based materials like PLA and PHA.

How Hemp Enhances Bioplastics

Bioplastics made from renewable sources like corn starch or sugarcane have been heralded as sustainable alternatives to petroleum-based plastics. But many unfilled bioplastics face performance challenges—such as brittleness, low heat tolerance, or unwanted odors caused by volatile organic compounds.

Hemp offers a practical solution. When finely processed into microfibers or micronized hurd, hemp can act as a reinforcing filler that improves flexural strength, heat deflection temperature, and dimensional stability in PLA and PHA compounds. These upgrades are especially valuable in high-performance manufacturing applications such as packaging, auto parts, consumer goods, and food service items.

Advancements in odor control are also making hemp-filled bioplastics more market-ready. New additives can bind and neutralize odor compounds, improving the smell and shelf appeal of bio-based products—especially important in packaging and consumer goods sectors.

Additives and Compounding Best Practices

With the right compounding techniques, manufacturers can further boost the performance of hemp-filled bioplastics. Additives like nucleating agents and impact modifiers are being developed specifically for use with natural fillers. These innovations help improve crystallinity, reduce part warpage, increase impact resistance, and even speed up cycle times in injection molding processes—all without compromising the clarity or compostability of the final product.

However, bio-based polymers and their fillers come with technical considerations. They are often more sensitive to temperature, moisture, and shear than conventional plastics, making the compounding process more complex. Techniques such as twin-screw extrusion and devolatilization, along with careful control of feed rates, residence times, and drying protocols, are essential to maintaining material integrity.

Building the Supply Chain

As bioplastic demand grows, so does the need for consistent, high-quality natural inputs—and that’s where the hemp industry can shine. Industrial hemp is a fast-growing crop that can be cultivated in a variety of climates, and with proper processing, its fiber and hurd can meet the rigorous demands of modern manufacturing.

The industrial hemp bioplastic supply chain transforms hemp from farm-grown crop to sustainable plastic alternatives through a multi-step process. It starts with cultivating and harvesting hemp, followed by processing the stalks to extract fibers and hurd. These materials are either left untreated, ground into fine particles, or chemically modified into MicroHemp fibers. They are then blended with bio-polymers, recycled plastics, or petroleum-based plastics by compounders to create custom plastic formulations.

These compounds are molded or extruded by manufacturers into a wide variety of finished products—ranging from auto parts and food packaging to toys, bags, and even 3D printing filaments. At the end of their life cycle, many of these products can be composted or recycled, reducing reliance on landfilling. Building this supply chain requires coordinated investment in farming, processing, material science, and manufacturing infrastructure, but it offers a compelling path toward a more circular and environmentally responsible plastic economy.

Looking Ahead

With growing interest in compostable packaging, bio-based consumer goods, and circular design principles, the timing for hemp’s role in bioplastics couldn’t be better. Emerging technologies and best practices are removing past limitations and positioning hemp as a key ingredient in the next generation of sustainable materials.

Industrial hemp is more than a sustainable crop—it’s a catalyst for American innovation. At NHA, we’re proud to be helping drive that future forward.

• reposted from the National Hemp Association

Jungmaven’s a brand that’s been repeatedly recommended to me in my reporting on wardrobe basics. Its tanks and tees are praised partly because they’re made with hemp, a more sustainable and durable natural fiber than cotton. While the brand offers options with different variations of hemp-and-cotton mixtures, Avila says her favorite has been the 55 percent hemp and 45 percent cotton fabric, which is what this Original Tee is made of. Its weight is in between Alex Crane’s lightweight linen and the Uniqlo U’s heavyweight tee, and it has a soft lived-in feel.

From Jim at Hempopolis:

Jungmaven and so many others these days are imagining and creating apparel and fabrics that fit our aim of sustainability, quality and best in class. Great fun to see sites like The Strategist taking notice!