SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the legislators-on-the-[micro]-ball dept.
The Environmental Audit Committee in the British parliament has called for a ban by the end of 2017 on plastic microbeads used in personal care products such as toothpaste, exfoliant and shower gel. The tiny beads are detrimental when eaten by fish. Some manufacturers had promised to end their use of the material by 2020.
The chair of the committee said:
Cosmetic companies' voluntary approach to phasing out plastic microbeads simply won't wash. We need a full legal ban, preferably at an international level as pollution does not respect borders. If this isn't possible after our vote to leave the EU, then the government should introduce a national ban. The best way to reduce this pollution is to prevent plastic being flushed into the sea in the first place.
The committee also speculated on the possibility of harm to wildlife from synthetic fibres such as those in microfleece cloth (sometimes made from recycled polyethylene terephthalate).
Sources:
The Guardian
BBC News
Press Association via Daily Mail
Previously:
Study Demonstrates Harm to Fish Caused by Microplastics
Ban on Microbeads Passes U.S. House of Representatives
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Hyperturtle on Thursday August 25 2016, @01:47PM
I'd hope somebody uses that list to make sure testing is done, rather than to simply use it as a bludgeon to stop innovation.
Not all change is bad, and some improvements actually are good.
Microbeads made of plastic was not a good change. When they previously had used grit made of silica (sand), that was better -- but they had to mine beaches and other other areas with the right size and shape due to erosion -- it's not like they took rocks and put them in the tumbler.
Too bad the microfiber clothes are a problem, too. I initially didn't think they were made from plastic fiber, but I read that often the content is made from recycled carpets and such that otherwise would end up in the same garbage if tossed out.
I guess if a similar product was made from Rayon or something, we'd hear Pandas are starving in China because of neat-freaks in the US demanding rayon for microfibers and that the cheapest is made from existing bamboo groves or something. It's how palm oil started to kill off orangatans, so it's not so far fetched to see that reach a similar conclusion.
Maybe the solution is just to scrub harder.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Thursday August 25 2016, @03:42PM
In the summary, I didn't mean to convey certainty that plastic fibres from clothing are harmful to wildlife. As far as I know, that hasn't been proven. However, one researcher has said that they are very common along the seashore. The Guardian paraphrased him as saying:
[...] 85% of the human-made material found on the shoreline were microfibers, and matched the types of material, such as nylon and acrylic, used in clothing.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/oct/27/toxic-plastic-synthetic-microscopic-oceans-microbeads-microfibers-food-chain [theguardian.com]
He showed that fibres come loose during washing of clothes, and he supposes that some are small enough to pass through sewage treatment systems.
abstract of the scientific paper (DOI: 10.1021/es201811s): https://archive.is/fD6g4 [archive.is]
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es201811s [acs.org]
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Thursday August 25 2016, @04:03PM
I actually speculated the same concerns he has written, about microfiber cloths losing such fibers in the laundry or doing vigorous use (as well as simple rinsing under a faucet) but chose to edit that out since I tend to write overly long comments...
I wonder what the static cling of these microbeads and fibers are, and if they glom together with other things to contribute to clogs over time--or if they can shed electrons to contribute to oxidative stresses of the systems they are floating around in or clogged in, inadvertantly contributing to the weakening of any biofilms and such intended to deal with organic messes and not man-made synthetics.