Fackrell 1

Mac Fackrell

Mrs. Jackie Burr, Instructor

English 1010, P. 3

26 November 2018

How Drastic is Plastic? The Effect of Plastic Pollution

On The Ecosystem

Though plastic brings about a simple and convenient short term solution to many

everyday problems and tasks, the long-term effects are detrimental to every living species.

Reducing or even eliminating the use of single-use plastics will help with the survival and well

being of humans and sea life alike. Establishing agreements to end fossil fuel subsidies, use

reusable consuming items, place a fee on using plastic bags or single-use plastics, and most

importantly aim for a zero-waste lifestyle will provide the world with a happy, sustainable

lifestyle that benefits nearly every living being on the planet. When sailing in the Pacific Ocean,

a marine scientist came across an expanse of water that contained such an abundance of plastic,

it was named the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. Due to the high volume of waste and the direction

of the currents, the waste is left to simply float along with the ocean’s ever changing tides. The

garbage becomes an issue when these plastics will never fully biodegrade or disappear. As the

earth can never fully absorb and get rid of them this provides an example of the damage done to

sea life which can then directly harm humans if consumed. These dumped plastics are made of

chemicals that are already harmful to humans which can lead to heart disease, diabetes, and

miscarriages later in life (Grosenick 35). Because the vicious winds and powerful waves are not

confined by imaginary international borders, everyone is susceptible to pollution related health

issues that are caused by waste humans produce and litter. The planet’s very own survival is why

lasting, impactful solutions are more important now than ever before.

To get a preliminary understanding of the subject, it is important to know how much

plastic pollution is in our oceans. Marcus Eriksen and crew estimated that there is nearly 268,940

tons of plastic particles floating at sea In their studies, the crew searched for and gathered various

plastics in the ocean and analyzed them to find pollution patterns and areas of high waste volume

and concern:

Our estimates suggest that the two Northern Hemisphere ocean regions contain

55.6% of particles and 56.8% of plastic mass compared to the Southern Hemisphere, with

the North Pacific containing 37.9% and 35.8% by particle count and mass, respectively.

(Eriksen et al. 7)

With North America is a leading plastic producer and polluter, the ocean to plastic ratio proves

just that. The largest accumulation of garbage in the world’s oceans, also known as The Great

Pacific Garbage Patch, is located right in the middle of the Hawaiian islands and California. The

GPGP fills roughly the surface area of 1.6 million square kilometers, an area that is close to

twice the size of Texas or three times the size of France (para. in “Ocean Cleanup”).

Making the extraction and use of fossil fuels cheaper and easier means the polluting of

the world’s waters will be dirtied just as fast as it is inexpensive. Using our natural resources

rather than these fossil fuels will limit the waste that hangs around, as naturally based plastics are

better for the environment. “Annually, 4-8% of oil is used to produce raw plastic. To reduce

production of plastic from raw materials, plastics must be decoupled from fossil fuels” (qtd. In

Borelle 5). By making fossil fuel usage cheaper than any alternatives, the waste will keep being
 Fackrell 3

pumped out by these subsidies at an unmanageable and unsustainable rate. “The United States

and Russia lead the way with more than $20 billion in domestic production subsidies handed out

each year…” (“Fossil Fuel Subsidies & Finance”). Reducing how much money we spend on

subsidies limits the amount of pollution caused, therefore helping the cleanliness of the air,

oceans, and life that lives with it. Without the production of waste, there is no pollution caused

by garbage.

Much of the plastic waste we produce ends up accumulating in landfills or our oceans.

According to Stephanie B. Borrelle, “60% of all plastics produces are accumulating in landfills

or are in the natural environment” (9996). This includes (and is not limited to) plastic utensils,

bottles, plates, tires, and plastic bags. Sophia Schultz informs that a plastic bag is used, on

average, for roughly 5 to 12 minutes (1). Since the bags don’t simply deteriorate, these extremely

limited use items will spend the majority of its existence polluting the world. Some of the plastic

Fig. 1, Fishing wire pulled out of the ocean. U.S. Catholic, Nov 2016, Vol. 81 Issue 11, p12-17,

6p, 7 Color Photographs, Color Photograph; found on p16.

comes from our very own clothing. More specifically, plastics that come from the fibers in our

clothing and get strewn about the sewer systems via washing machine. Since clothing is meant to

last, the plastics don’t wear down as quickly as others. Instead, they move around in bodies of

water, and when fish feed they consume these fibers which contain the plastics. If we eat the fish

who consumed our clothing fibers, humans are then eating the same fibers. The microplastics

that end up in our water and our landfills can act like a sponge and carry around diseases or

toxins that can cause health issues and affect the wellbeing of our food sources (Grossman 1-2).

As previously mentioned, in an extensive study it was estimated that at least 268, 940 tons of

plastic is currently floating at sea. The results were measured by testing microplastics, meaning

the broken down, miniscule remnants of plastic left behind from their origin (Eriksen et al. 7).

The image above depicts a massive reel of fishing line that was dumped into the ocean, then later

recovered. There is over one million pounds of waste similar to and even more harmful for life

floating about in the water.

The cost of plastic pollution is evident when we look at our planet’s wellbeing, but when

you place an actual fee on the subject of the matter, pollution can be managed and lessened.

Plastic pollution alone costs the United States roughly $13 billion a year, whether it is for

cleanup projects or compensation for affected systems or companies. When going to a grocery

store, you usually get an option between paper or plastic bags to use to tote your groceries

around. In Scotland, a fee was placed on using single-use plastic bags. The small fee, close to

five cents per bag, caused an 80% decrease in single use plastic bags. Similar results were

reported in Wales and Northern Ireland where they witnessed a 96% decrease (Grosenick 3). The

minute fee, if implemented in a leading plastic producer such as the United States, could help
 Fackrell 5

wash away the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. In 2013, according to the EPA, the United States

alone produced 33 million tons of plastic waste. The two types of plastic that make up the

majority found at sea are those materials used for making plastic bags and bottles, as well as the

plastics used for making bottle caps, fishing nets, and straws (Skolnick 2). The microplastics left

behind by their initial product have been found in Arctic ice and deep sea deposits, allowing

harm and potential disease to infest these territories. According to Helen Briggs, nearly 30% of

plastic in the oceans come from microplastics and not larger pieces of plastic that have somewhat

disintegrated. Materials from tires and clothing fibers are among the leading causes of ocean

pollution, along with what is listed above (Briggs 1).

It is important to note that the reason plastic pollution in the ocean is important is simply

because it reduces the chance of survival in sea life, which leads to less food for other predators,

prey, and humans. The entire food chain is affected, therefore it becomes everyone’s

life-threatening problem:

It is commonly known that harmful PBT (Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic) chemicals

are found in ocean plastics, so researchers at The Ocean Cleanup tested plastic samples

from the expeditions for their chemical levels… They found through various tests that

84% of the plastics in the GPGP contain at least one type of PBT chemical. (“Ocean

Cleanup”)

When plastic items or waste litter the ocean, they prevent oxygen from entering the ecosystem as

easily, reduces nutrient flow, and blocks light from entering the water. This limits the amount of

algae that grows, limiting a food source for many sea creatures. “These tiny algae form the base

of the food webs in these habitats, which means their proliferation is important for animals
 Fackrell 6

higher up in the food chain,” (“Plastic Not Fantastic” 1). Knowing that means that the algae is

vital for fish to consume and survive and recognizing that if there is not enough available, it

could cause extreme damage to the entire food chain. “...singer/songwriter and ocean advocate

Jack Johnson held over a bucket to capture the [plastic] shards, most smaller than a grain of rice”

(Skolnick 1). The entire food chain is so easily affected by changes in their lifestyle. The dangers

posed when consuming hazardous materials can be deathly, since much of the microplastic is not

noticeable to the naked eye.

Now it is time to fix the massive mess we have made. To live upon a plastic island will

not only cause health problems, but it means that the damage is almost irreversible, so it must be

stopped while there is still a chance. Major cities in the world have goals to become zero-waste,

meaning the entirety of their production and daily functions are made possible by renewable

energy and sustainable manufacturing. “‘Zero waste’ means designing and managing products

and processes systematically to avoid and eliminate the waste and materials, and to conserve and

recover all resources from waste streams” (Zaman 73). This means producing things out of

eco-friendly materials that can be recycled or that will biodegrade quickly and entirely, leaving

behind no microplastics or harmful remnants that can hurt life. If a natural plastic were used as

an alternative to single-use plastic bags, their limited usage would be no problem as it would

actually disappear. Several major cities such as New York City aim to be zero-waste by 2030,

which would eliminate any need for fines on single-use plastic. Becoming completely

sustainable means that floating waste would become fertilizer and compost if made out of natural

resources, actually benefiting the natural life it encounters rather than killing it.
 Fackrell 7

With more than 200,000 tons of garbage swaying in the tides, the number will not be

getting smaller. The majority of that number consists of microplastics, which can vary by size

but are all extremely small. Plastics that are not eco-friendly or biodegradable get broken down

to miniscule sizes, but never fully disappear, turning into those damaging microplastics. In turn,

fish and other sea creatures consume the litter thinking it is food. Unfortunately, the plastics can

carry harmful diseases or pathogens that can be passed from life to life, up and down the food

chain. On the top of that food chain is humans, who consume the fish that have eaten the infected

plastic. With garbage thrown into the waters, man has created their own toxic threat which

happens to be a part of a primary food source.

To limit and hopefully eliminate these effects, reducing the production and use of

single-use plastics is imperative. To limit the conscious and unconscious damage of our waste,

mindfulness and resourcefulness will to lead the way. Placing fees on the usage of single-use

plastic items can limit the amount of waste produces and bring in revenue for anti-plastic

campaigns. A few of the many solutions to single-use, microplastic, and plastic pollution include

using reusable bags, utilizing reusable water bottles or glass jars for beverages, storing food in

glass containers instead of plastic zip bags, using reusable straws or no straws at all, and buying

soap that doesn’t contain plastics or microbeads that will seep into the ocean. More specific and

stern international regulations on the use and distribution of single-use plastics have shown to

cause a significant reduction in the amount used and given out. Fees placed on the use of harmful

plastics showed an almost complete elimination of people wasting plastic bags. The other two

major polluters, tires and clothing fibers, can be manufactured to cause less harm to the

environment by utilizing more advanced filters and earth-friendly materials. Aiming for zero or
 Fackrell 8

minimal waste lifestyles will limit the quantity of lasting, harmful garbage littered about. It also

serves as a catalyst for improvement as recycling and composting become food or growing

sources for natural life.

Works Cited

Borrelle, Stephanie B., et al. “Why We Need an International Agreement on Marine Plastic

Pollution.” ​Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of

America​, vol. 114, no. 38, Sept. 2017, pp. 9994–9997. ​EBSCOhost,​

doi:10.1073/pnas.1714450114.

Briggs, Helen. “Plastic from Tyres 'Major Source' of Ocean Pollution.” ​BBC News​, BBC, 22

Feb.

2017, Web. bbc.com/news/science-environment-39042655.

Eriksen, Marcus, et al. “Plastic Pollution in the World’s Oceans: More than 5 Trillion Plastic

Pieces Weighing over 250,000 Tons Afloat at Sea.” ​PLoS ONE​, vol. 9, no. 12, Dec. 2014,

pp. 1–15. ​EBSCOhost​, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111913.

“Fossil Fuel Subsidies & Finance.” ​Oil Change International,​ Oil Change International,

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/.

Grosenick, Charles. “The Price of Plastic.” ​Administrative & Regulatory Law News​, vol. 42, no.

3, Spring 2017, pp. 34–35. ​EBSCOhost,​

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=124306790&site=ehost-live.

Grossman, Elizabeth. “How Plastics From Your Clothes Can End Up in Your Fish.” ​Time.Com,​

Jan. 2015, p. N.PAG. ​EBSCOhost​,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=100513313&site=ehost-live.

Ocean Cleanup. “The Great Pacific Garbage Patch.” ​The Ocean Cleanup,​

Web. Nov 22, 2018. theoceancleanup.com/great-pacific-garbage-patch/.

“Plastic Not Fantastic for Marine Life.” ​USA Today Magazine​, vol. 145, no. 2865, June 2017,
 Fackrell 10

p. 7. ​EBSCOhost​,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=123360708&site=ehost-live.

Schultz, Sophia. “Reducing Plastic Pollution.” ​Alternatives Journal (AJ) - Canada’s

Environmental Voice​, vol. 43, no. 2, Mar. 2017, pp. 68–69. ​EBSCOhost,​

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=127198058&site=ehost-live.

Skolnick, Adam, and Jack Johnson. “Sailing the Plastic Seas.” ​Rodale’s Organic Life​, vol. 1,

no. 3, Sept. 2015, pp. 82–87. ​EBSCOhost​,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=108722414&site=ehost-live.

Zaman, Atiq Uz, and Steffen Lehmann. “Challenges and Opportunities in Transforming a City

into a ‘Zero Waste City.’” ​Challenges,​ vol. 2, no. 4, Feb. 2011, pp. 73–93.,

doi:10.3390/challe2040073.