The issues surrounding plastic pollution are some of the most recent and discussed worries of humanity. Moderating plastic usage and adopting more environmentally friendly habits has been (somewhat) encouraged by charities and government schemes for decades, without any satisfying success. It is only recently, now the impacts of human actions have become undeniable, that the pursuit for knowledge and solutions surrounding this problem has generated some momentum. However, although it may currently sound sacrilegious to question, are all plastics ‘bad’?
To answer this, it’s important to consider the history and current use of plastics, as well as some common misconceptions embedded in the public psyche.
Plastics can be categorized as thermosets (cannot be reheated and reused after initial formation) or thermoplastics (can be reformed with heat and reused) and are mostly synthetic, consisting of long chains of polymers; large molecules formed by joining many identical smaller molecules called monomers. These polymers are strong, flexible, and lightweight and, over the last 150 years, despite the feasibility of being synthesised from natural sources such as cellulose (cotton fibres), the preferred sources have remained products of crude oil.
The first synthetic polymer, a thermoplastic labelled celluloid, was patented by John Wesley Hyatt in 1869 to imitate natural substances used for billiard balls such as horn and ivory. The realisation that humanity could forge its own materials, rather than being completely reliant on natural ones, sparked a revolution that benefited communities economically and socially by making material wealth easier to obtain, while relieving the stress of material demand on the environment.
Soon after, the need for a natural electrical insulator for a world increasingly reliant on electricity for industrial and domestic use became the incentive for bakelite; the first purely synthetic plastic, invented in 1907 by Leo Baekland. Bakelite was malleable, durable, heat resistant and ideal for mass production. Its success gave rise to the plastic industry
Plastics made their major debut during the second world war, with production in the US increasing by 300%; Nylon replaced silk in parachutes, ropes, body armour, helmet liners, and Plexiglas provided a glass alternative for aircraft windows. Post-war the frenzy continued as the benefits of plastics seemed endless; cheap, safe, sanitary and adaptable to every need; a seemingly utopian ability was granted to humanity, the ability to combine and transmute the elements into infinite configurations of choice, without consequence.
This optimism didn’t last long. The ‘Swinging Sixties’ was a decade of rapid change for Britain; revolutions in music, fashion, gender roles, and technology fuelled by feverish waves of post-war excitement were joined by improved environmental and ethical awareness. Gradually, blind trust and traditional deference towards authority figures were replaced by suspicion and apprehension, and as knowledge of climate issues increased, plastic’s (and hence plastic waste’s) durability - the very quality which was previously praised - began to trouble sensitive consumers. However, at this stage the full extent of the damage being inflicted on the environment was still obscure.
A total of 7.8 billion tonnes of plastic was produced between 1950 and 2015: a number exceeding the total number of people currently living on the planet.
Yet, the most critical impacts of plastic are not necessarily the scale of production, but the amount of mismanaged plastic that is littered or inadequately disposed of, which then infiltrates natural ecosystems causing catastrophic damage. Of the 31.9 million tonnes of mismanaged plastic waste at risk of leaking into the environment per year, approximately 8 million tonnes enters the oceans. However, estimates of plastic quantities in surface waters range from just 10,000s to 100,000s of tonnes; a discrepancy of this order of magnitude raises a question: where is all the missing plastic? Although the answer is still unclear, current hypotheses include gross measurement uncertainties when tracking plastic, plastics accumulating on shorelines rather than in the ocean itself and finally, microplastics: fragments of plastic less than 5mm in length, formed by continuous disintegration of macroplastics through ultraviolet light and natural processes. These have the potential to be ingested by organisms and integrated into ocean sediments, until they become nearly impossible to trace.
Even if we were to cease expelling any more plastic waste expelled into the ocean, macroplastics would persist for many more decades- not only are the existing plastics extremely durable, but there are also large reservoirs of plastics on shorelines capable of drifting to offshore regions.
For wildlife, and in turn humans, microplastics can have numerous detrimental impacts. As the number of plastic fragments in the environment increases, their relatively large surface area to volume ratio allows for effective attraction of chemicals and fertilizers present in the water, while their size means that they can be easily ingested by marine animals, which become injured or poisoned as a result. In this way, toxin ‘biomagnification’ - the increase in toxin concentration with advancement through the food chain- can occur,finally reaching humans. The health effects of this are still unknown.
Nevertheless, despite the tremendous environmental concern surrounding the emerging populations of microplastics, it would also be false to assume that the best solution for civilisation and natural eco-systems is to prohibit plastic altogether.
Plastic fulfils many important roles in modern society. Inexpensive plastics raised living standards and made many common possessions only obtainable for the wealthy easier for the average person to acquire. Plastic is an excellent material for food and medical packaging; even though over-packaging and “single-use” plastics definitely pose a problem, by using plastic, food loss, wastage, and contamination are significantly reduced. Not only do plastics protect populations from potentially harmful germs, according to the British Plastics Federation their relatively lighter weight compared to packaging alternatives reduces the number of vehicles needed to carry the same amount of goods, hence requiring less fuel, saving resources, and reducing carbon emissions associated with transportation.
The environmental impacts of different materials depend heavily on the suitability of the material for the task, as well as how it is managed preceding, throughout, and at the end of its ‘lifetime’. Ill-suited materials have the potential to be substantially more environmentally harmful, and unfortunately many incidences of this occur due to simple misunderstanding; some plastic bag alternatives have high environmental impacts and would require many reuses to make them worthwhile. An ‘environmentally- friendly’ organic cotton bag would actually have to be reused 149 times to have as low greenhouse gas emissions as a LDPE (Low Density Polyethene) bag, and 20,000 times when eutrophication (when a body of water becomes overly enriched with minerals and nutrients which induce excessive growth of algae), water and ecosystem impacts are considered.
Even if plastic pollution may seem almost impossible to escape, humans have an innate intellectual curiosity and affinity for innovation, especially in the face of adversity. For instance, researchers succeeded in isolating a soil fungus able to break down polyester polyurethane from a general city waste disposal site in Islamabad, Pakistan, making plastic elimination in the environment through biodegradation conceivable.
After recognising the daily plastic malpractices made by the public, and becoming aware of the power of resourcefulness and imagination in tackling the global mismanagement of plastic, it can be seen that theplastic industry cannot solely be blamed for this ‘microplastic menace’; the responsibility lies with producers and consumers to make environmentally conscious decisions concerning the sources, quantity and disposal of plastics, and to be innovative with possible solutions to decrease reliance on plastics. Choices often involve balancing trade-offs, and it is our responsibility to ensure that the consequences are as least environmentally damaging as possible.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
My name is Elena Priesen-Reis and I am currently in my third year studying for a MSci in physics. During the summer of 2019 I decided to be spontaneous and take part in a 10-week volunteering program with Restless Development in rural Uganda. During my time there I experienced many shocking and delightful things, but the main aspects that stood out to me were most likely influenced by my science background and passion for the environment; the visible impacts that climate change was already having on this vulnerable community, the attitudes in response to this, and local attempts to tackle this issue. The entire experience was extremely eye-opening for me, and I hope that through my article I am able to provide others with even just a glimpse of the situation in locations such as Kangulumira, who’s weak infrastructure and geographical location put them at serious danger in the face of the growing climate crisis. After returning to the UK I realised that climate degradation was indiscriminate of location, and became inspired to write about prevalent issues closer to home; plastics have been a major topic among climate activists and scientists in recent years, and by delving into some of the facts and figures I hope to provide readers with more information so that they may be motivated to reassess their current lifestyle and actions.
Comentarios