Download Sources, Fate and Effects of Microplastics.

Microplastics in the marine environment and the food chain - science and mitigating strategies
Sources, Fate and Effects of Microplastics.
Thomas Maes
Seafish
Common Language Group
22/03/2016
Friend’s House
173-177 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BJ
Marine Litter
FACTS & FIGURES
Marine Litter
What is Marine Litter:
Any man-made object discarded, disposed of, or abandoned that enters the coastal or marine
environment. It may enter directly from a ship, or indirectly when washed out to sea via rivers, streams and
storm drains.
Types of Marine Litter:
Ranges from common domestic material (bags, cups, bottles, balloons) to industrial products (strapping
bands, plastic sheeting, hard hats, resin pellets) to lost or discarded fishing gear (nets, buoys, traps, lines).
Where does it come from:
- Ocean-based Sources: Fishing Vessels, Cargo Ships, Stationary Platforms, Fish Farming Installations,
Pleasure Crafts and Other Vessels
- Land-based Sources: Littering, Dumping, Poor Waste Management Practices, Untreated Sewage and
Storm Water Discharges, Riverine Inputs, Industrial Facilities, Tourism, Extreme Natural Events
Ocean Conservancy International Coastal Clean Up
Krichim, Bulgaria . Photo: Dimitar Dilkoff
Plastic Waste Inputs (Jambeck et al., 2015)
• Linking worldwide data on solid waste,
population density, and economic status
to estimate the mass of land-based
plastic waste entering the ocean.
• 275 million metric tons (MT) of plastic
waste was generated in 192 coastal
countries in 2010, with 4.8 to 12.7
million MT entering the ocean.
• Without improvements predicted to
increase by an order of magnitude by
2025
• Currently 150 million MT of plastic in
oceans based on estimated leakage per
year since 1950
Figure: Global map with each country shaded according to the estimated mass
of mismanaged plastic waste [millions of metric tons (MT)] generated in 2010 by
populations living within 50 km of the coast.
We considered 192 countries. Countries not included in the study are shaded
white.
Socio-Economic Impacts of Marine Litter
Damage to people, property and
livelihood can be grouped into
the following general categories:
• Fishing boats and gear
• Fish & Shellfish stocks
• Safety risks for people at sea
•
Tourism revenues
•
Contamination of
beaches
•
• Damage to intakes
• Blocked waterways
• Aesthetic value
Contamination of
harbours
•
Health hazards to
people
•
...
Environmental Impacts of Marine Litter
• 600+ different animal species are known to have suffered from entanglement and ingestion of plastic debris (STAP, 2013).
• Harmful Effects:
• Entanglement & Ingestion
• Smothering and disturbance of the seabed
• Accumulation and dispersion of toxic substances
• Transport of invasive species
• …
• Abandoned Derelict Lost Fishing Gear – GHOST FISHING
MICROPLASTIC
SOURCES & FATE
BUILT TO RESIST
Maximenko et al., 2010
MODELLING
North Sea Particle Tracking + Hydrodynamic model
HOTSPOTS
For floating particles:
• beaches (in particular the South Coast and North Norfolk)
• salinity front off continental coast
• Skagerrak gyre
• Central North Sea
For sinking particles:
• beaches
• deeper areas (in particular Oyster Grounds, Norwegian Trench)
BEACH
WATER
ENTRY
FRAGMENTATION
BIOTA
REMOVAL
FRAGMENTATION
DEGRADE
SEAFLOOR
Microplastics
• Smaller than 5mm
• 2 types of Microplastics (MP):
• PRIMARY MP: enters the
marine environment in this
form
• SECONDARY MP: result
from breakdown of larger
items
Microplastics in UK Sewage Treatment Waters
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
One off study – 9 samples (3 x sludge/effluents/ sediment)
Similar concentrations as found in other studies
High number of microplastics in sediments surrounding outlets
80% Reduction between Sludge and Effluents
Only fibres in effluents and sludge, predominantly polyester and acrylic (textiles?)
length of the fibres on average 600µm and ranged between 80µm and 4mm
Fibres and spheres were found in the river sediments surrounding the effluent outflow
Small plastic foils were absent in all samples
Breakdown by
UV & Physical
forces
Sinking
of heavy
particles
Ingestion by
biota
Floating due to
de-fouling
Sinking due to
production of fecal
pellets and marine snow
Sinking because
of biofouling
MICROPLASTIC
EFFECT
Lusher et al., 2012
Van Cauwenberghe et al.,
2015
©5Gyres
Van Franeker et al., 2010
FIELD
LABORATORY
Coles et al., 2013
GESAMP (2015)
ENTANGLEMENT
v
GHOST FISHING
INGESTION
INVASIVES
TOXINS
???
MICROPLASTICS
Schematic illustration of risk as a function of consequence (the harm posed by a hazard) and likelihood.
Potential biological interactions of microplastics with marine organisms.
1. Scavengers (detritivorus and deposit feeders) could ingest microplastics in sediment;
2. Non-selective benthic predators could ingest microplastics on the seabed or suspended in lower part of water column;
3. Filter-feeders seem to ingest plastic microspheres due to their similarity with algae. They may be susceptible to sinking microplastic particles;
4. Suspension-feeders, like filter-feeders, seem to ingest plastic microspheres due to their similarity with algae. They may be susceptible to sinking
microplastic particles
5. Active predation by vertebrates like fish, birds and mammals could lead to ingestion of microplastics instead of biologic matter
Tentative Adverse Outcome Pathway scheme for microplastics exposure of aquatic species showing potential pathways linking ingestion, uptake across
membranes, and chemical release with adverse outcomes of growth inhibition and reproductive decline (Galloway and Lewis, 2016).
EU MICRO
• Modelling & Prediction
• Sampling at Sea surface, Water column, Sediment, Shrimp & Mussels
- 8 microplastic fibres/shrimp
- 500 microplastic particles/kg DW sediment
• Chemical & Bacterial Analysis of Microplastics
• Impacts were observed on major physiological functions such as digestion, immunity, reproduction and growth when exposed to
high concentrations in lab conditions
• Between £1,5 million and £500 million potential costs to Oyster and Mussel aquaculture in UK
• Potential Impacted Areas:
• Hampshire & Isle of Wight region in oyster sector
• Dorset region in mussel sector
• Devon and Norfolk in terms of tourism
Marine Litter Initiatives
• MARLISCO
• EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive
• OSPAR Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter
• G7 Marine Litter Action Plan
MARLISCO
FP7 MARLISCO
Marine Litter in European Seas: Social Awareness and co-responsibility
By developing innovative mechanisms and tools, MARLISCO effectively engaged, informed and
empowered society, reaching the widest possible audience. Its activities included:
- A scoping study of the sources and trends regarding marine litter in each Regional Sea.
- A collection of best practices from all partner countries.
- A survey on the prevailing perceptions and attitudes of different stakeholders regarding marine
litter.
- A European video contest for youngsters to collect their visions on the issue of marine litter and
empower them as agents of change in society.
- National debates in 12 partner countries.
- Diversified, tailor-made national activities including e-learning, exhibitions, workshops,
festivals, clean ups, etc.
http://www.marlisco.eu
MARLISCO – 73 BEST PRACTICES











E.g.:
Waste minimisation guide for aquaculture
Blue Flag Beaches
Plastic Bag Fee
Plastic free shops
Fishing for Litter
Litter removal in rivers
Litter removal schemes by divers
Beach Cleans
Operation Clean Sweep
…
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive
DIRECTIVE 2008/56/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 17 June 2008
10 DESCRIPTORS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Biological diversity
Non-indigenous species
Commercial fish and shellfish stock
Marine food webs
Eutrophication
Sea-floor integrity
Hydrographical conditions
Concentrations of contaminants
Contaminants in seafood
Marine litter
Introduction of energy (noise)
DESCRIPTOR 10: “Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and marine environment”
OSPAR Regional Action Plan 2014-2021
• The OSPAR objective with regard to marine litter is “to substantially reduce marine litter in the OSPAR maritime area to levels
where properties and quantities do not cause harm to the marine environment” by 2020. In order to achieve this objective the
North East Atlantic Environment Strategy also commits to “develop appropriate programmes and measures to reduce amounts
of litter in the marine environment and to stop litter entering the marine environment, both from sea-based and land-based
sources”.
• 3 Levels: Guidelines/Recommendations/Agreements
• 4 areas: Sea-based sources, Land-based sources, Removal Action, Education and Outreach
• 55 collective and national actions which aim to address both land based and sea based sources, as well as education and outreach
and removal actions
• Key actions:
- Port Reception Facilities
- Waste from fishing industry
- Fines for littering at sea
- Fishing for litter
- Abandoned and lost fishing gear
- Floating litter hotspots
- Education and outreach
- Improved waste management
- Sewage/stormwater run-off
- Reduction of single use items
- Removal of micro plastics from products/zero pellet loss
- Redesign of harmful products
G7 Marine Litter Action Plan
• Commit to the improvement of countries’ waste systems as a key goal of the action plan, to prevent, reduce and remove marine litter,
including the below listed priority actions.
• Recognize that support through international development assistance and investments are important to combat marine litter and
encourage both.
• Support development and implementation of national or regional action plans to reduce waste entering inland and coastal waters and
ultimately becoming marine litter, as well as to remove existing waste.
• Share best practices, especially with developing countries, and encourage a similar call to action in other international fora.
• Recognize that, where available, the use of existing platforms and tools for cooperation will reduce duplication and take advantage of
progress made (e.g. the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA), the
Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML) and the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans) and therefore support their use.
• Promote individual and corporate behaviour change through public awareness and education to address marine litter.
• Recognize that prevention is key to long-term success in addressing and combating marine litter and that industries and consumers have an
important role to play in reducing waste.
• Recognize that the need for removal actions is important, due to the vast amounts of litter already in the marine environment.
• Support the use of a broad range of policy toolkits and available instruments, including economic incentives, market-based instruments, and
public private partnerships to support implementation of actions to effectively combat marine litter.
SOLUTIONS
REDUCE, REUSE, RECYCLE
• Improving waste management infrastructure is paramount but requires substantial resources and time
• While such infrastructure is being developed, countries can take immediate action by reducing waste and
curbing the growth of single-use plastics.
• Revise and develop regional and national action plans on marine litter
• Apply mixture of small/medium/large scale approaches
• Awareness raising at public, industry and governmental level
• Monitoring & Modelling
• Define source, zones of accumulation and degree of ecological, environmental and socio-economic
impacts
• Stakeholder consultation and buy-in
• MARPOL Annex V
• FAO Code of Practice for Responsible Fisheries
• Prevent and reduce Abandoned, Lost and Discarded Fishing Gear
• …
The only way to manage the
marine litter pollution issue is by
limiting the input—changing
ways and behaviours that cause
marine litter to enter the
environment.
http://www.cefas.co.uk/