In order to spark the discussion I give a little input:

https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/15/16314928/justin-hofman-seahorse-plastic-pollution-photography

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/09/14/nature-photographer-snaps-jaw-dropping-photo-he-wishes-didnt-exist/661977001/

And here is a so called wildlife photo of the year...

A young boy wades through ocean plastic debris in Indonesisia, also see https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/09/14/nature-photographer-snaps-jaw-dropping-photo-he-wishes-didnt-exist/661977001/

Apparently National Geographic Magazine has also started a campaig:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/planetorplastic/

So let us join forces with WWF and National Geographic Magazine and change the health of the oceans...

One of the known problems to all biologists certainly are free floating ghost nets, see

Very interesting topic for a real discussion!

Plastic bags are particularly devastating to tortoises, because in the sea they mimick the food of them - jellyfish, see picture...

Many animals fill their stomach with wastes - again a fact known to all wildlife biologists working at the sea or the coasts (concerning fish, whales, seals, birds, tortoises, etc.)...

Here I am also sharing ideas of how to prevent plastic wastes, see

https://thedharmatrails.com/alternative-to-plastic-bags/

And here I am sharing the website from the prestigious Natural History Museum London on this issue of plastic at the seas, again with our seahorse clinging to the plastic q-tip (the seahorse is sooo fragile and an adquate picture of the vulnerable natural species and habitats)...

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/the-reality-of-a-sewage-surfer.html

WWF Australia has created an educational graphic on the long lasting persistance of plastics in the sea, URL: https://www.wwf.org.au/news/blogs/the-lifecycle-of-plastics#gs.eyw32g

Also an enducational resource as graph from the US NOAA (National Ocean Service) on the durability of plastic wastes in the ocean, see https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/marinedebris/plastics-in-the-ocean.html

Here comes a teaching resource preapared by WWF...

https://www.tes.com/teaching-resource/wwf-oceans-and-plastics-ks2-activity-set-11967554

And that is possibly a way out: teach the young about the dangers of plastic, microplastic, plastic in the fish, in the food chain, about plastic accumulation in internal organs such as the liver of humansd and making us ill and getting cancer...

The more I search the internet the more information I find - there is enough out there - it is about time to start changing things....

https://futurism.com/plastic-decomposition

https://www.pinterest.de/pin/164592561360612764/

https://www.alansfactoryoutlet.com/how-long-does-it-take-plastics-to-break-down

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/indl-goods/svs/paper-/-wood-/-glass/-plastic/-marbles/our-plastic-pollution-problem/articleshow/64420276.cms

Again the NOAA, see https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/multimedia/infographics

NOAA about money spent to clear plastic debris in the US, see

https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/1500wide/public/md-econ_graphic1__large.png?itok=6hjIHcU4

NOAA with a political statement on your choices, see

https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/1500wide/public/web-earthmonth.png?itok=Pq6bkLtG

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-42264788

Marine life is facing "irreparable damage" from the millions of tonnes of plastic waste which ends up in the oceans each year, the United Nations has warned.

"This is a planetary crisis... we are ruining the ecosystem of the ocean," UN oceans chief Lisa Svensson told the BBC.

But how does this happen, where is most at risk and what damage does this plastic actually do?

Why is plastic problematic?

Plastic as we know it has only really existed for the last 60-70 years, but in that time it has transformed everything from clothing, cooking and catering, to product design, engineering and retailing.

One of the great advantages of many types of plastic is that they're designed to last - for a very long time.

And nearly all the plastic ever created still exists in some form today.

In July a paper published in the journal Science Advances by industrial ecologist Dr Roland Geyer, from the University of California in Santa Barbara, and colleagues, calculated the total volume of all plastic ever produced at 8.3bn tonnes.

Of this, some 6.3bn tonnes is now waste - and 79% of that is in landfill or the natural environment.

This vast amount of waste has been driven by modern life, where plastic is used for many throwaway or "single use" items, from drinks bottles and nappies to cutlery and cotton buds.

Four billion plastic bottles...

Drinks bottles are one the most common types of plastic waste. Some 480bn plastic bottles were sold globally in 2016 - that's a million bottles per minute.

Of these, 110bn were made by drinks giant Coca Cola.

Some countries are considering moves to reduce consumption.

Proposals in the UK include deposit-return schemes, and the improvement of free-drinking water supplies in major cities, including London.

So how much plastic waste ends up in the sea?

It's likely that about 10m tonnes of plastic currently ends up in the oceans each year.

In 2010 scientists from the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis and the University of Georgia in Athens estimated the figure as 8m tonnes, and forecast that to rise to 9.1m tonnes by 2015.

The same study, published in the journal Science in 2015, surveyed 192 coastal countries contributing to ocean plastic waste, and found that Asian nations were 13 of the 20 biggest contributors.

China was top of the list of countries mismanaging plastic waste, but the US also featured in the top 20 and contributed a higher rate of waste per person.

Plastic waste accumulates in areas of the ocean where winds create swirling circular currents, known as gyres, which suck in any floating debris.

There are five gyres around the globe, but the best known is probably the North Pacific gyre.

More on this topic:

• Blue Planet II advisers feel 'shame and anger' at extent of plastic
• Images of a global problem
• All the BBC's news on plastic pollution

It is estimated debris takes about six years to reach the centre of the North Pacific gyre from the coast of the US, and about a year from Japan.

All five gyres have higher concentrations of plastic rubbish than other parts of the oceans.

They are made up of tiny fragments of plastic, which appear to hang suspended below the surface - a phenomenon that has led it to being described as plastic soup.

And the hard-wearing qualities of most plastics means that some items can take hundreds of years to biodegrade.

However, there are moves to clean up the North Pacific gyre. An operation led by a non-profit organisation Ocean Cleanup is due to begin in 2018.

How bad are things in the UK?

The Marine Conservation Society found 718 pieces of litter for every 100m stretch of beach surveyed during their recent Great British Beach Clean Up. That was a 10% increase on last year.

Rubbish from food and drink constituted at least 20% of all litter collected, the MCS reported.

The origin of a lot of the litter is difficult to trace, but the public contributes about 30%. "Sewage-related debris", or items flushed down toilets that should have been put in the bin, amounted to some 8.5%.

Why is plastic so harmful to marine life?

For sea birds and larger marine creatures like turtles, dolphins and seals, the danger comes from being entangled in plastic bags and other debris, or mistaking plastic for food.

Turtles cannot distinguish between plastic bags and jellyfish, which can be part of their diet. Plastic bags, once consumed, cause internal blockages and usually result in death.

Larger pieces of plastic can also damage the digestive systems of sea birds and whales, and can be potentially fatal.

Over time, plastic waste slowly degrades and breaks down into tiny micro-fragments which are also causing scientists concern.

A recent survey by Plymouth University found that plastic was found in a third of UK-caught fish, including cod, haddock, mackerel and shellfish.

This can result in malnutrition or starvation for the fish, and lead to plastic ingestion in humans too.

The effect on humans of eating fish containing plastic is still largely unknown.

But in 2016 the European Food Safety Authority warned of an increased risk to human health and food safety "given the potential for micro-plastic pollution in edible tissues of commercial fish".

Produced by Alison Trowsdale, Tom Housden and Becca Meier. Design by Sue Bridge and Joy Roxas.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-42264788

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-42264788

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-42264788

https://www.statista.com/chart/8616/the-worlds-oceans-are-infested-with-plastic/

https://www.statista.com/chart/15905/the-estimated-number-of-years-for-selected-items-to-bio-degrade/

https://www.statista.com/chart/14120/the-countries-banning-plastic-bags/

Only very fiew countries have actually banned plastic yet. Now we slowly turn into the view of what could, what must be done...

https://www.statista.com/chart/14120/the-countries-banning-plastic-bags/

A ranking of the most polluting countries, see

https://www.statista.com/chart/12211/the-countries-polluting-the-oceans-the-most/

If this interactive graph does not work go to the statista-site...

Some real science on plastic degradation in marine ecosystems, see

Article Pathways for degradation of plastic polymers floating in the...

https://thedharmatrails.com/alternative-to-plastic-bags/

The single people can do a lot in terms of minimizing and sometimes abolishing the use of plastic. However, it is necessary that scientific research, which is already on the right track, intensifies and accelerates efforts. The Kyoto Institute of Technology had already discovered the bacterium that feeds on plastic, especially polyethylene terephthalate (PET) used to produce plastic bottles. This bacterium is able to digest plastic thanks to two enzymes called Petase and Mhetase. A few weeks ago both the Petase and the Mhetase, the latter already decoded in April 2018 by a group of British and US researchers, were synthesized, now they can be used to recycle the PET. However, there is still much work to do.

It's not a gain saying that we will get to a stage where man will directly consume Polychlorinated Biphenyls. As a result of the consequences of our actions towards the planet.

Here are some piece of advice

1. Active awareness on the need for rejecting plastics and cellophenes

2. Collaboration between government and NGOs in formulation of policies that will ban the use of theses non-biodegradables

3. Promotion of ecofriendly materials and incentive attachment to ideas and innovation that promotes the use of biodegradable means of packaging

4. Active involvement of teens and kids in environmental conservation activities

5. Self consciousness of our actions towards environmental conservation and protection.

There are lots of recommendation but we lack implementation of the ideas.

May God make us an advocates of the planet Earth

And education to all relevant groups of society of all ages, such as pupils/students, Sellers, consumers/users about plastic use minimation/reduction?!

Destruction at source and go for paper packets

Good ideas and invention are required...

Yesterday came the journal The Linnean, wrapped in biodegradable wrapping... (Picture)

And the National Geographic Magazine is dristibuted globally for ages (I am receiving the journal since 1995) wrapped in cardboard paper... (Picture)

The Linnean Society has decided to distribute its journals in compostable, biodegradable wrappings - an example for a responsible group or business decision - not only individuals can and must contribute to the reduction of plastics...

Another good example is the Geographical Journal of the Royal Geographical Society, again distributed in compostable wrapping... Thank you!

It seems that most of the paper is produced from the trees so you should not exceed in the use of paper. The paper must be spared as much as possible. As far as biodegradable casings are concerned, it seems to me that they are mainly produced from agricultural processing waste, so even if they are expensive, I believe it can be widely used. Perhaps it would be appropriate for scientific journals to be sent in electronic format so that researchers print only the cover, the index and the articles in which they are interested.

A new study financed by WWF and conducted by the University of Newcastle (Australia) has been published that results in alarming data: humans are taking up 5 gramms microplastic per week while eating and drinking (water, herbal nutrition, fish and animals)...

see https://www.wwf.de/themen-projekte/meere-kuesten/plastik/plastik-umgibt-uns-auch-in-unserer-nahrung-wasser-und-luft/?newsletter=infonewsletter%2FHausliste%2F2019%2F06%2F15%2Fplastic-diet%2Fbajo-caguan%2F433416&utm_source=infonewsletter&utm_campaign=stop-plastic&ecmId=3D9WMKHV-EQLPLK&ecmEid=FW8I-3D9WMKHV-EG14WY&ecmUid=1GKX3UZF-21PDRD

That eaquals a credit card per week or a ball pen of plastic per week...

YourPlasticDiet WWF, see

YourPlasticDiet WWF, see

https://www.newcastle.edu.au/newsroom/featured-news/plastic-ingestion-by-people-could-be-equating-to-a-credit-card-a-week/how-much-microplastics-are-we-ingesting-estimation-of-the-mass-of-microplastics-ingested.

How Much Microplastics Are We Ingesting?: Estimation of the Mass of Microplastics Ingested.

Tuesday, 11 June 2019

Kala Senathirajah and Thava Palanisami

The University of Newcastle, Australia

Summary of the study methodology

Microplastics have been defined as plastic particles with an upper size limit of 5 mm. Microplastics are of significant concern as they may pose a direct threat (by ingestion), or indirect threat (by acting as potential stressors or vectors of contaminants) to humans. Mismanagement of primary and secondary microplastics may be accumulated and/or transferred through the food chain and reach our digestive system and bloodstream. This paper attempts to provide a snapshot through a systematic review of the published literatures, and calculate an ingestion rate for humans considering various exposure pathways. This study analysed the available literature as a method for data collection and synthesis to allow for an estimation of the amount of microplastics ingested by humans. A critical research of the available literature and subsequent unit normalized calculation of the amounts of microplastics ingested by humans through various exposure pathways suggest that on average, humans may be ingesting as much as 5 g/week of microplastics.

Several databases were interrogated to obtain the most recent relevant publications. The metadata was extracted and recorded. The literature review presented information on many different methods for sampling and analysing microplastics to identify and quantify them. Reporting units also varied greatly among studies. In order to compare the data, several conservative assumptions were made. The conservative approach was adopted to minimise the risk of over-predicting and from alarming the public, or risking incredulity from decision-makers and other stakeholders. The data was extrapolated to infill and populate missing data to derive a total number of microplastic particles (particles) and total mass particles (kg) to then allow for the calculation of ingestion rates (kg/week/person) based on estimated individual particle mass (kg/particle). A second approach using the density and volume of the particles was adopted to assess the impact of volume weighting in determining the calculated average mass of each microplastic particle.

Due to the limited data available on the particle size distribution of microplastics, an average mass per particle in the size range 0-1mm was adopted to represent the average particle mass for each microplastic particle ingested. It was decided that this study would discount the mass of particles >1mm for the calculation of ingestion rate.

The literature was interrogated for several counts of microplastics in staples such as water, shellfish, fish, salt, beer, honey and sugar. This project did not take into account other possible direct ingestion sources such as the honey, fish, sugar (for which data was collated) or rice, pasta, bread, milk, utensils, cutlery, toothpaste, toothbrushes, food packaging and a multitude of other sources that would only add to the amount consumed. As such, there is confidence that based on the literature reviewed and subsequent analysis performed that up to 5 g/week of microplastic particles is potentially ingested by humans. Having said that, it should be stressed that the amount of the microplastics ingested by an individual will depend on a combination of parameters that is highly variable not only pertaining to the characteristics of the microplastics but also to each’s age, size, geographic location, demographics of the location, nature of development and life-style options.

This study is being reviewed for publication; the full methodology and supplementary data will be available upon acceptance.

1. References

Attwood, S., (2019). Microplastic ingestion methods paper, WWF-Singapore Unpublished Internal Report.

Belzagui, F., Crespi, M., Alvarez, A., Gutierrez-Bouzan, C., Vliaseca, M., (2019). Microplastics' emissions: Microfibers' detachment from textile garments. Env Poll 248: 1028-1035. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.02.059

Boucher, J., Friot, D., (2017). Primary microplastics in the oceans: A global evaluation of sources. IUCN (2017). doi:10.2305/IUCN.CH.2017.01

Cai, L., Wang, J., Peng, J., Tan, Z., Zhan, Z., Tan, X., Chen, Q., (2017). Characteristics of microplastics in the atmospheric fallout from Dongguan city, China : preliminary research and first evidence. Environ Sci Pol Res 24 (32): 24928 - 24935.

Cai, M., He, H., Liu, M., Li, S., Tang, G., Wang, W., Huang, P., Wei, G., Lin, Y., Chen, B., Hu, J., Cen, Z. (2018). Lost but can’t be neglected: huge quantities of small microplastics hide in the South China Sea, Science of the Total Environment 633: 1206-1216.

Catarino, A.I., Macchia, V., Sanderson, W.G., Thompson, R.C., Henry, T.B., (2018). Low levels of microplastics in wild mussels indicate that microplastic ingestion by humans is minimal compared to exposure via household fibres fallout during a meal. Environ Poll 237: 675-684. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.02.069

Karbalaei, S., Hanachi, P., Walker, T.R., Cole, M., (2018). Occurrence, sources, human health impacts and mitigation of microplastic pollution.Environmental Science and Pollution Research (25): 36046 – 36063. doi: 0.1007/s11356-018-3508-7

Kaurovas, I.G., Etyemenzian, V., Xu, J. Du Bois, D., Green, M. Pitchford, M.L., (2006). Assessment of the principal causes of dust-resultant haze at improve sites in the Western United States

Kim, J.S., Lee, H.J., Kim, S.K., Kim, H.J., (2018). Global pattern of microplastics in commercial grade salts: sea salt as an indicator of seawater microplastic pollution, Environ. Sci. Technol. 52: 12819−12828. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.8b04180.

McIlwraith, H.K., Lin, J., Erdle, L.M., Mallos, N., Diamond, M.L., Rochman, C.M. (2019). Capturing microfibers - marketed technologies reduce microfiber emissions from washing machines. Marine Pol Bul 139: 40-45.

Qu, X., Su, L., Li, H., Liang, M., Shi, H., (2018). Assessing the relationship between the abundance and properties of microplastics in water and in mussels. Sci. Total Environ. 621: 679-686.

Schymanski, D., Goldbeck, C., Humpf, H.-U., Fürst, P., (2018). Analysis of microplastics in water by micro-Raman spectroscopy: release of plastic particles from different packaging into mineral water. Water Res. 129: 154–162.

Vandermeersch, G., Van Cauwenberghe, L., Janssen, C.R., Marques, A., Granby, K., Fait, G., Kotterman, M.J.J., Diogene, J., Bekaert, K., Robbens, J., Devriese, L., (2015). A critical view on microplastic quantification in aquatic organisms. Environmental Research 143: 46-55. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2015.07.016

Plastic ingestion by people could be equating to a credit card a week

Wednesday, 12 June 2019

A new study finds on average people could be ingesting approximately 5 grams of plastic every week, which is the equivalent weight of a credit card.

📷 Dr Thava Palanisami

The analysis No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion from Nature to People prepared by Dalberg, based on a study commissioned by WWF and carried out by University of Newcastle, Australia, suggests people are consuming about 2000 tiny pieces of plastic every week. That’s approximately 21 grams a month, just over 250 grams a year.

The University of Newcastle is the first to combine data from over 50 studies on the ingestion of microplastic by people. The findings are an important step towards understanding the impact of plastic pollution on humans. It also further confirms the urgent need to address the plastic system so that it does not pollute ecosystems in the first place.

“These findings must serve as a wake-up call to governments. Not only are plastics polluting our oceans and waterways and killing marine life - it’s in all of us and we can’t escape consuming plastics. Global action is urgent and essential to tackling this crisis,” said Marco Lambertini, WWF International Director General

“While research is investigating potential negative effects of plastic on human health, we are all clear that this is a worldwide problem that can only be solved by addressing the root cause of plastic pollution. If we don’t want plastic in our bodies, we need to stop the millions of tons of plastic that continue leaking into nature every year. In order to tackle the plastic crisis, we need urgent action at government, business and consumer levels, and a global treaty with global targets to address plastic pollution,” continued Lambertini.

The study demonstrated a wide range in ingestion patterns. Whilst being mindful of the limitations of this evolving field of research, initial findings point towards a global average ingestion rate of plastic by humans of approximately 5 grams per week.

The single largest source of plastic ingestion is through water, both bottled and tap, all over the world. Large regional variations are reflected again, with twice as much plastic found in the US or India than in European or Indonesian water. Of the consumables studied, those with the highest recorded plastic levels include shellfish, beer and salt. The findings of the report demonstrate that the problem of plastic pollution is a universal one and directly affecting people. Leakage of plastic into our environment and food chain has been met so far with an inadequate global response by governments.

No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion from Nature to People calls for governments to step up and play a key role in ensuring the entire chain in the plastic system, from manufacturers to consumers, are held accountable to the common goal of ending plastic pollution. WWF is mobilising the public to support the global petition calling for a legally binding treaty on marine plastics pollution that has already garnered over 500,000 signatures. The treaty would establish national targets and transparent reporting mechanisms that extend to companies. Additionally, the treaty should provide for financial and technical support for low-income countries to scale up their waste management capacity.

“While the awareness of microplastics and their impact on the environment is increasing, this study has helped to provide an accurate calculation of ingestion rates for the first time. Developing a method for transforming counts of microplastic particles into masses will help determine the potential toxicological risks for humans moving forward,” comments Dr Thava Palanisami, project co-lead and microplastics researcher at the University of Newcastle.

Ingestion is just one aspect of a much wider plastics crisis. Plastic pollution is a major threat to wildlife, not only through microplastic ingestion but via entanglement and habitat destruction. Plastic pollution also has damaging economic consequences, with the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) estimating its annual economic impact on the ocean economy at US$8 billion.

Further details on the methodology can be found here.

https://www.newcastle.edu.au/newsroom/featured-news/plastic-ingestion-by-people-could-be-equating-to-a-credit-card-a-week

Global WWF Campaign, see

https://yourplasticdiet.org/

and also

https://www.wwf.or.jp/file/20190612_oceana01_1.pdf and

https://www.mumbrella.asia/2019/06/wwf-cautions-against-plastic-diet-in-campaign-created-by-grey-malaysia

TV spots are also run, see

https://youtu.be/rET9pdBzb8E

Canada plans to ban single-use plastic by 2021!, see

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/10/americas/canada-single-use-plastics-intl-hnk/index.html and

https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/10/18659644/canada-ban-single-use-plastics-bags-straws-2021

Where are Plastic Bags Banned Around the World?​

A New Study on Plastic Bag Bans

Plastic bags are indisputably bad for the environment.

The average bag you pick up at the grocery store, or carry your takeout in, has a lifespan of about 12 minutes. When discarded, they clog sewage and storm drains, entangle and kill an estimated 100,000 marine mammals every year, and degenerate into toxic microplastics that fester in our oceans and landfills for up to 1,000 years.

Despite this, shoppers collectively use around 500 billion single-use plastic bags every year. That’s 150 bags per person, per year, for every single person on Earth — or enough to circle the globe 4,200 times.

Luckily, we’re starting to see communities around the U.S., and the world, mobilize to reduce waste by banning, taxing, or otherwise limiting the use of these plastic bags.

ReuseThisBag.com wanted to take a big-picture look at where legislation has been passed, and what its effects have been. Which cities in the US are leading the way for plastic bag bans? Internationally, which countries have made the most significant push?

Summary of Key Takeaways

• In the U.S., only 2 states (CA and HI) have banned plastic bags on a statewide level
• 4 U.S. states (DE, ME, RI, NY) have mandatory recycling or reuse programs in place
• 10 U.S. states (AZ, FL, IA, ID, IN, MI, MN, MO, MS, WI) have places preemptive bans on banning plastic bags.
• ~200 U.S. municipalities have banned or taxed plastic bags; outcomes have been largely positive, including:
  • San Jose, CA: Reduction of plastic bags in storm drains (89%), rivers (60%), and residential areas (59%); average # of bags per person reduced from 3 to 0.3.
  • San Francisco, CA: Savings of up to $600k per year in plastic processing fees.
  • Seattle, WA: Reduction of plastic bags in both residential (48%) and commercial (76%) waste.
• Globally, plastic bags are banned in 32 countries, 18 of which are in Africa

Plastic bag legislation in the US

Many lists of plastic bag bans exist online — but most are convoluted and hard to understand. In assembling our data, we drew public information from the National Conference of State Legislators and a number of state-level, and country-level reports.

Let’s start with the United States.

📷

In America, only two states have conclusively banned single-use plastic bags: Hawaii and California.

Though Hawaii’s ban came first, it wasn’t technically a state-wide ban: all five Hawaiian islands (Big Island, Honolulu, Kauai, Maui, and Pala) individually banned plastic bags at various points — the last of which took effect in 2015. The bans, which aim to fully phase in by 2020, range in definition and severity, but generally still allow for the use of 100% recyclable plastic bags.

California passed a unilateral, state-wide ban in September of 2014, and it went into effect in November of 2016. The law bans single-use plastic bags at all large retailers, and imposed a 10-cent charge for paper bags. Before the law was passed, more than 100 California counties already had various bans in place.

📷

In 2009. Washington, DC imposed a 5-cent tax on all single-use plastic bags after independent studies found them to be the single largest source of pollution in local waterways — and a number of states (New York, Maine, Rhode Island, Delaware) have put partial taxes or bans into place, but haven’t yet made the full leap.

Meanwhile, 10 states — Arizona, Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Missouri, Indiana, Mississippi, Florida, and Wisconsin — have preemptively banned plastic bag bans. In these states, the plastic industry’s heavy lobbying paid off.

Do bans actually work?

Since the two statewide bans are relatively new, data on outcomes are still largely unfounded, but we can turn to a few studies run by the more than 200 individual cities and municipalities that have enacted ordinances around the country.

Over 200 counties and municipalities have enacted ordinances either imposing a fee on plastic bags or banning them outright, including all counties in Hawaii.

In San Jose, California, for instance, a ban was put into place in 2012 — and since then, there has been an 89% reduction in plastic bags in storm drains, a 60% reduction in creeks and rivers, and a 59% drop in residential plastic waste.

In nearby San Francisco (ban enacted in 2007), the city has saved a reported $600,000 per year in plastic processing fees alone.

And in Seattle, where bags were banned 5 years ago, residents have seen in 48% drop in residential plastic bag waste, and a 76% decline in commercial plastic bag waste. In 2010, there were 262 tons’ worth of plastic bags in landfills; by 2014, that dropped to 136 tons.

Where are plastic bags banned around the world?

America is far from the most progressive country when it comes to plastic bag bans internationally.

At least 32 countries around the world have plastic bag bans in place — and nearly half are in Africa, where plastic bags frequently clog drains, leading to increased mosquito swarms (and, as a result, bouts of malaria).

📷

The bans in these countries range widely in severity, but Kenya’s, put into place last year, surely take the cake: anyone “making, selling, of importing” plastic bags could face fines of up to $19,000, and 4 years in jail.

In China, plastic bag waste was so bad that it led to the coining of the term “white pollution.” A full ban was adopted in 2008 — and since then, plastic bag waste has dropped by 60% to 80%, an effective reduction of some 40 billion bags. The country does, however, still face enforcement issues.

And in India, where an estimated 20 cows per die die from plastic ingestion, a ban has been in effect since 2002.

📷

Some 18 countries also have taxes in place, which have proved to be a viable alternative to a full ban.

In Ireland, a 22c plastic bag tax has reduced usage by as much as 90%. Portugal has seen a drop in excess of 85%. And since imposing a tax in 2003, Denmark has seen the lowest plastic usage in Europe. Averaging just 4 bags per person, per year.

It’s crucial that America, and the rest of the world, follow the lead of countries and states that have taken action against plastic bags.

Globally, as many as 160,000 plastic bags are used every second — and currently, only 1 to 3% of them are recycled. This simply isn’t sustainable behavior.

📷

The easiest, and most affordable, thing you can do is purchase reusable grocery bags. Today, these bags are made from a wide range of materials (cotton/canvas blends, ripstop, woven rPET), and come in an unlimited number of customizable designs.

And they last a lot longer than 12 minutes.

https://www.reusethisbag.com/articles/where-are-plastic-bags-banned-around-the-world/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-plastic-bag-bans-work/

"Do Plastic Bag Bans Work?

Can such initiatives make a dent in the amount of plastic litter?

Dear EarthTalk: What’s the latest on efforts to ban plastic bags? How many U.S. locales have instituted some kind of ban, and have these initiatives made a dent in the amount of plastic litter?—Melinda Clarke, New York, NY

California made big news recently when it announced the first statewide ban on plastic shopping bags set to kick in during the middle of 2015. Beginning in July, large grocery stores, pharmacies and other food retailers in the Golden State will no longer be able to send shoppers home with plastic bags, while convenience markets, liquor stores and other small food retailers will join the ranks a year later.

Back in 2007, San Francisco became the first U.S. municipality to ban plastic shopping bags. In intervening years upwards of 132 other cities and counties in 18 states and the District of Columbia instituted similar measures. Of course, Americans are late to the party when it comes to banning plastic bags: The European Union, China, India and dozens of other nations already have plastic bag bans or taxes in place.

But the trend here toward banning plastic shopping bags comes in the wake of new findings regarding the extent and harm of plastic in our environment. Since plastic isn’t biodegradable, it ends up either in landfills or as litter on the landscape and in waterways and the ocean. Plastic can take hundreds of years to decompose and releases toxins into the soil and water in the process.

Littered plastic is also a huge problem for the health of wildlife, as many animals ingest it thinking it is food and can have problems thereafter breathing and digesting. The non-profit Worldwatch Institute reports that at least 267 species of marine wildlife are known to have suffered from entanglement or ingestion of marine debris, most of which is composed of plastic; tens of thousands of whales, birds, seals and turtles die every year from contact with ocean-borne plastic bags. A recent European Commission study on the impact of litter on North Sea wildlife found that some 90 percent of the birds examined had plastic in their stomachs.

Another reason for banning plastic bags is their fossil fuel burden. Plastic is not only made from petroleum—producing it typically requires a lot of fossil-fuel-derived energy. The fact that Americans throw away some 100 billion plastic grocery bags each year means we are drilling for and importing millions of barrels worth of oil and natural gas for a convenient way to carry home a few groceries.

It’s hard to measure the impact of pre-existing plastic bag bans, but some initial findings look promising. A plastic bag tax levied in Ireland in 2002 has reportedly led to a 95 percent reduction in plastic bag litter there. And a study by San Jose, California found that a 2011 ban instituted there has led to plastic litter reduction of “approximately 89 percent in the storm drain system, 60 percent in the creeks and rivers, and 59 percent in City streets and neighborhoods.”

Environmental groups continue to push for more plastic bag bans. “As U.S. natural gas production has surged and prices have fallen, the plastics industry is looking to ramp up domestic production,” reports the Earth Policy Institute. “Yet using this fossil fuel endowment to make something so short-lived, which can blow away at the slightest breeze and pollutes indefinitely, is illogical—particularly when there is a ready alternative: the reusable bag.”

CONTACTS: Worldwatch Institute, www.worldwatch.org; Earth Policy Institute, www.earth-policy.org.

https://www.reusethisbag.com/articles/where-are-plastic-bags-banned-around-the-world/

https://www.reusethisbag.com/articles/where-are-plastic-bags-banned-around-the-world/

https://www.reusethisbag.com/articles/where-are-plastic-bags-banned-around-the-world/

https://www.reusethisbag.com/articles/where-are-plastic-bags-banned-around-the-world/

https://www.reusethisbag.com/articles/where-are-plastic-bags-banned-around-the-world/

Preprint THE PHILOSOPHICAL STUDY OF INTELLECT EVOLUTION

I agree with auther. It could work. Many EU countries already bannedsingle use plasttc items like bags, forks, knives, plares, spoons.

We need strong legislation that panned the use of the plastic bags, awareness campaigns about the hazardous effects and finding new affordable alternatives such as natural friendly-environment products

But it is not only about plasic bags... It is also about straws, placic coffee Cups to GI and Q-tips. In otherveords it is about all the things produced for single use and dispersal afterwards...

I agree with my colleague Carsten Weerth, not only for plastic bags

A new data set concerning this Question/RG Thread has been released, see

Data Verbote und Beschränkungen: Abfallexporte weltweit

It is held in German but contains data, infographs and other material in English...

Ban on single use plastic, replace it by recyclable plastic,create awareness, apply law strictly and punished heavily for single use plastic

I think Greta Thunberg would have an answer for this question, so you might need to consult her. She was declared by the environmentalist mafia the patron saint of the planet, so no need for academics to scratch their heads in search for answers. Now the rather divine solution rests with Saint Greta of Thunberg. For one thing you should be sure: the problem rests only with the West and their evil plastic straws...

@Ridvan Peshkopia, your answer is not considered helpful, sorry...

Yes, there should be a global tax on non-biodegradable plastic to encourage substitution of sustainable alternatives. Countries refusing to cooperate should see tariffs imposed on all their exports equivalent to the estimated plastic tax avoided. The tax would be based on estimated damages per ton of plastic waste to fisheries, wildlife, vacation venues, etc. Satellites should also be used to monitor the dumping of municipal solid waste into the oceans, and countries refusing to stop such practices should be subject to economic sanctions and additional export tax penalties. The U.S., Japan, EU, and South Korea should lead the way by agreeing to enforce the global plastic tax. Similar strategy should be utilized with respect to GHG emissions with a "Play" or "Pay" policy.

@Carsten Weerth, I was sure that you'd consider my answer unhelpful, but when you are in the public space, every answer counts. Your question was private only as long as it was sitting within your head, and only because you ventured to put it out in the public space does not make you the Supreme Judge of my answer's validity/helpfulness. Indeed, I just noticed that someone found it helpful and recommended it. But I know what answers count to you (because you are not invalidating them): Tax, tax, tax! Punish, punish, punish! Ban, ban, ban! Who could have thought academics would be so passionately inclined toward repression? This sounds more like ideology than scholarship.

As Goebbels would have said, "when I see a plastic straw, I reach out for my gun."

Friendly greetings from Kosovo!

Taxes are one way of regulating single-use plastics.

Even more successful will be Bans and legal restrictions that can be enforced adequately...

Taxes with offsets provide more flexibility to industry to respond to an externality in the most cost effective manner relative to command and control type bans, etc. But I have no issues with global bans on direct dumping municipal solid and human waste into water ways. Economic theory is pretty clear that when social costs significantly exceed private costs of production, which is likely the case with non-biodegradable or non-recycled plastic, as well as GHG emissions, than intervention in the marketplace makes sense if it can be done in a way that minimizes market distortions and unintended consequences. I favor revenue neutral taxes on carbon and plastic, which addresses concerns about big government, growth of bureaucracy, etc. as expressed by the comments above. This is preferred to burying ones head in the sand and arguing against science and common sense that there is no social cost of pollution.

Please CITE :

Biodegradability of Plastics: Challenges and Misconceptions by Kubowicz S &

Booth AM . PMID: 29022342 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b04051

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/plastic-how-planet-earth-environment-oceans-wildlife-recycling-landfill-artificial-a7972226.html

Kaushik Kumar Panigrahi thank you for sharing that link which contains intersting info and further links...

On the Recycling of PET plastic bottles...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PET_bottle_recycling

Thank you @Ales Kralj for sharing some light into a very dark business...

Our government and industry simply are lying to the public and all customers...

In Germany we try to solve the Problem with self-steering of the industry since 20 years and simply fail...

This is why I opt for single use plastic bans now....

A background report, https://m.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/technik/plastikmuell-deutschland-recycelt-nur-5-6-prozent-des-abfalls-a-1248715.html

Microbial degradation is very effective

Some more data on the dirty plastic issue has been published in the yearly Plastik Report 2019 by BUND and Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung that I attach here...

BUND-material for teaching pupils on the issue of plastic and plastic reduction, see https://www.bund.net/fileadmin/user_upload_bund/_migrated/publications/141127_bund_meeresschutz_plastikmuell_im_meer_faltblatt.pdf

Plastic packing materials dissemination in the sea and on the ground is a real undeniable challenge. Looking for scientific/technological solutions is the right path, though it can take unpredictable time and cost. There are quite efficient service/economic actions, that can substantially mitigate this problem.

Looking back in the history, USSR for example, paid at the food shops or other special reception places for returned back empty glass bottles of milk and other diary products, empty glass bottles of bear, lemonade, and other beverage. Those bottles were reused in the food industry after cleaning for many times. That made those measures quite economically reasonable and effective.

Due to the lack of metal in the former USSR, old out-of-use metal objects as light as very heavy ones were brought to the specialized reception places, where they had been paid for to citizens and sent for recycling.

Currently, many food stores in US require shopping customers to bring their own permanent many times reusable bags (that can be bought in the same store or elsewhere) instead of offering one-time-usage big size thin plastic bags. Some similar efficient economic measures can be spread widely in one or another form, depends on a country and local specifics.

I am unable to offer any suggestion to rid our waters, etc, of plastic in all its modelled forms but this extreme threat to animals and the environment in total has been known since the 1970s, discussed with appropriate handwringing. It did not stop it.

Certainly, it may be the worst of all the problems caused by humankind.

Dear prof Carsten Weerth

Excellent topic and issue for discussion and following, I myself try to teach and research in green chemistry/ environmental chemistry in the field of smart natural packaging by waste of agricultural and food industry ,..... as a safe and environmental concern due to our landfills being filled by billions of tons of non-biodegradable and harmful and toxic waste every year .

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Micro-plastic_atelier_in_Mediterraneo_island

Awarness of the common people as well as Govt should be taken in care ( For Bio-degradable / Non -Biodegradable polymers ) . A R&T team is to be developed with the help of polymer scientists of all the countries .

Have you seen this paper?

Preprint Microplastics in the environment: Much ado about nothing? A debate

Plastic pollution in the environment has been around since the 1980ies and we tried to fight it at school already...

A couple of factors now make it come back with a hype:

- Social media easily are spreading pictures of wildlife and plastic...

- Environmental organizations such as WWF take the topic up again and make campaigns out of it...

- Media coverage has steppted in possibly because they are more aware on the destruction of your environment (climate, waters, soil...)

- Scince know has produced an relyable dataset on the dispersal of microplastics in the environment and nutritions chainds from seefood into human beings...

- For the first time studies about the human uptake of microplastic have been published and discussed widely...

Whether its climate change or plastic pollution, we have to develop robust policies that provide the right economic incentives for all governments and the private sector to internalize the externalities in their economic and policy decisions. In addition, international organizations and treaties need to incorporate an optimal combination of adaptation, mitigation, and intervention to provide time for technology, revenue neutral taxes/credits, and perhaps limited command and control measures to ultimately reverse the the long-term damage.

Here I am sharing the open lies and marketing tricks by Germany's industry regarding the full recycling of plastic products by help of an example...

At first the picture depicted 100 % recycling... Now additional information claims "our plastic bottles come from 50 % recycled plastics"...

Rinsing and reuse is only done with glass bottles in Germany (since about 100 years)

The Plastic bottles are collected in machines that directly press them in order to minimize the volume and prevent a rinsing and direct re-use...

Agreed, the textile industry and single use plastic manufacturers needs to shift to biodegradable fibers/materials, perhaps manufactured from bacteria at scale, where there is some type of physical trigger, (microwaves, light, plasma, electromagnetic field, or chemical that facilitates end of life bio-degradation.

a lot is spent researching all kinds of things

  rich countries should invest in biodegradable plastics