Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth

Plastic Pollution is Changing Entire Earth System, Scientists Find (theguardian.com) 86

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
Plastic pollution is changing the processes of the entire Earth system, exacerbating climate change, biodiversity loss, ocean acidification, and the use of freshwater and land, according to scientific analysis. From a report: Plastic must not be treated as a waste problem alone, the authors said, but as a product that poses harm to ecosystems and human health. The authors gave their warning in the days before final talks begin in South Korea to agree a legally binding global treaty to cut plastic pollution. Progress towards a treaty on plastic pollution has been hindered by a row over the need to include cuts to the $712bn plastic production industry in the treaty.

At the last talks in April, developed countries were accused of bowing to pressure from fossil fuel and industry lobbyists to steer clear of any reductions in production. The discussions in South Korea, which start on 25 November, mark a rare opportunity for countries to come to an agreement to tackle the global crisis of plastic pollution. In 2022 at least 506m tonnes of plastics were produced worldwide, but only 9% gets recycled globally. The rest is burned, landfilled or dumped where it can leach into the environment. Microplastics are now everywhere, from the top of Mount Everest to the Mariana Trench, the deepest point on earth.

The new study of plastic pollution examined the mounting evidence of the effects of plastics on the environment, health and human wellbeing. The authors are urging delegates at the UN talks to stop viewing plastic pollution as merely a waste problem, and instead to tackle material flows through the whole life pathway of plastic, from raw material extraction, production and use, to its environmental release and its fate, and the Earth system effects.

Plastic Pollution is Changing Entire Earth System, Scientists Find More | Reply

Plastic Pollution is Changing Entire Earth System, Scientists Find

Comments Filter:

  • "The science isn't settled." (Score:4, Funny)

    by downshifter ( 6807436 ) on Thursday November 07, 2024 @11:59AM (#64927917)
    "We need more time for studies." "It's a natural cycle." "Trees will grow and absorb the plastic." "It will hurt the economy." "China isn't curbing plastic."
    • "I will not willingly change any aspect of my life, no matter how trivial or arbitrary, no matter how vital the change is for the future prosperity or even survival of our species."

      • Re:"The science isn't settled." (Score:4, Insightful)

        by nightflameauto ( 6607976 ) on Thursday November 07, 2024 @12:13PM (#64927951)

        "I will not willingly change any aspect of my life, no matter how trivial or arbitrary, no matter how vital the change is for the future prosperity or even survival of our species."

        "If it doesn't outright kill the entire planet in my lifetime, what do I care?" That seems to sum up most when it comes to large, long-term impact.

      • https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]

        A treaty works only if the countries that dump the most plastic into the environment without disposing of it properly based on modern methods should go first..

        I do not want another treaty based on which country consumes the most or which country uses the most for manufacturing. It has to go after the polluters first.

        This is for plastic pollution only and not the many, many ways the UN and the countries without enforced plastic waste pollution laws try to benefit at the econ

        • https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
          A treaty works only if the countries that dump the most plastic into the environment without disposing of it properly based on modern methods should go first.

          That's a link to plastic pollution in the Asia-Pacific region. It's logical that countries that contribute most to pollution in the Asia-Pacific region are likely to be Asia-Pacific countries.

          • Treaty negotiations should be based on the total amount of plastic pollution that countries allow to be dumped into the environment. Negotiations should not be based on which country manufacturers the most plastic and not be based on which country consumes the most plastic but disposes of 99.9% of it in as environmentally friendly way as possible.

            These treaty negotiations should not be based on per-capita or on the manufacturing side, they should be based on reducing the amount of plastic being dumped into

    • Oh well it's too late do prevent any problems, so I don't need to do anything at all.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by zlives ( 2009072 )

      The problem is too big for humans to fix, i will pray on it.
      it is gods will.

      • The problem is too big for humans to fix, i will pray on it. it is gods will.

        Why do you need to pray?
        God already knows everything. He knows what you want.
        Or do you think God is a democracy and he's counting the prayers for both sides?

    • Ironically the plastic may create more LGBTQ+ people; it messes with hormones in lab mice. Sperm counts are going down and pollution may be a cause. Evangelical "science" and dereg may eat each other.

      "Gay frogs" may be one of the few conspiracies Alex Jones got right; his "broken clock" moment. Don't tell him, he'll let it go to his head and Gish Gallop the web with yet more conspiracies, 99.9% which are bogus.

      • LGBTQ people, maybe. I'm still not convinced sexual orientation isn't more nuture than nature. (It doesn't matter what causes it, I believe people have a right to decide for themselves how to live in that regard.)

        Trans people specifically, on the other hand... they have the same rights, but I more strongly suspect plastic to be involved there due to some of the constituents being shaped almost exactly like human sex hormones.

  • Plastic will affect practically every ecosystem and process on the planet.

    Plastic is inert and will remain in the environment for hundreds or even thousands of years.

    Choose one.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Muros ( 1167213 )
      I pick the one that was in the article.

    • I choose plastics are turning the frogs gay.

    • Plastic will affect practically every ecosystem and process on the planet.

      Plastic is inert and will remain in the environment for hundreds or even thousands of years.

      Asbestos is also inert. Much more inert than plastic.

      Choose one.

      Asbestos proves that you can choose more than one.

      (Hint: For example, inert particles of the right size and shape can mechanically interfere with the function of chromosomes.)

    • Plastic will affect practically every ecosystem and process on the planet.

      Plastic is inert and will remain in the environment for hundreds or even thousands of years.

      Choose one.

      Why just one? [wikipedia.org]

  • The number one thing that can be done, yet I never hear any mention of it, is... clothes. Make a filtration system that can capture the shedding of synthetic fibers at both the manufacturing stage and for washers / driers. That'll be a HUGE win for the environment.

    Then tire dust. A long distance third would be plastic straws...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AvitarX ( 172628 )

      I'd think bottles are way before straws, and maybe clothes.

      • Plastic straws are replaced much more easily (with paper ones) than plastic bottles. So, do them before bottles? (And actually, we have.)

        I'm not saying we shouldn't address both.

        • Plastic straws are being replaced with paper ones... that are wrapped in plastic!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AvitarX ( 172628 )

          The aluminum screw top bottles seem to replace at least up to a half liter pretty well.

          The bottles have the advantage of being essentially as good in their replacement. Paper straws are meh.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by _dj6_ ( 8250908 )
      Plastic is being added to paper packaging and as paper food container liners and whatnot as well that present huge risks. These are very thin layers of plastic that will probably degrade or shed nano and micro plastics into the air and food (and also compromise the paper recycling). So besides the clothing, this is another major win/reduction that could be made to go to something organic like some type of wax.

    • Re:Then go after the source (Score:5, Interesting)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Thursday November 07, 2024 @02:38PM (#64928543) Homepage Journal

      The number one thing that can be done, yet I never hear any mention of it, is... clothes. Make a filtration system that can capture the shedding of synthetic fibers at both the manufacturing stage and for washers / driers. That'll be a HUGE win for the environment.

      It doesn't take anything special for that for washers, at least. We have lots of water filters that will do the job. The problem is, you can't expect people to use them correctly. Because the water coming out of the washer gravity drains once it's pumped past the bend in the drain hose, you can't have much restriction or you will just have an overflow. So then your drain needs a bypass overflow, and people won't clean the trap, and then they'll just have a moldy trap and the same amount of stuff will go down the drain.

      Then tire dust.

      There is far more tire dust than clothes dust. It is the priority. Problem is, you cannot get rid of it in any way but getting rid of cars. You could maybe make a tire that would break down gracefully, but it would almost certainly have a far reduced lifespan. The thing that really makes sense is to shift to transportation using rail, but look at how that's turning out in e.g. California (where we could really benefit from it, since we have the most vehicle miles traveled in the nation.)

    • One can just avoid purchasing cloths with polyester, acrylic, or nylon, or at least keep them longer.
      And recycle plastic bottles.
  • You can't ban plastics because there are no real alternatives. No company who makes plastics is going to stop voluntarily if it brings in money. Recycling has failed out right, mostly because we made it the consumer's issue. We have no horizontal movement available, and yet scientists want a solution, but the solution has to be available.

    Either you go hard, and dramatic, something like "No disposable plastic for consumer use.", mixed with: "Advanced filtration for the oceans, air, groundwater, etc...",

    • Re:So what's the solution? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ebunga ( 95613 ) on Thursday November 07, 2024 @01:32PM (#64928339)

      Actually quite a lot has been done in the past 30 years. Solar has gotten to the point that it's relatively inexpensive to provide more than 100% of a household's electrical needs with solar even during winter months. The excess can be used to charge batteries, which have better cost and storage density than anything available 30 years ago, which will be able to provide power at night.

      I have also recently learned that everything I thought I knew about wind power is about 25 years out of date.

      Things have changed to a point that even a particular academic that plainly stated "solar and wind will never work at true grid scale" has changed his position. He's still 100% correct on the infeasability of hydrogen, though.

      • Sure, but more to the point, we haven't really solved anything, we're still rushing to resolve a problem we've had decades to address.

    • You can't ban plastics because there are no real alternatives.

      Eh, if you watch old TV shows/movies, you can see that they got by fine with wood/paper, glass, rubber and metal (remember metal?). Oh and cotton for clothes. There might be much that requires plastics, but I'll be there's much more that doesn't, if cost is removed from consideration.

      • You can absolutely use glass soda bottles, and move back to natural fibre clothing, but to tackle the plastic problem, we need hard action, and that I don't see possible or happening.
    • Re: "You can't ban plastics because there are no real alternatives." - Bollocks. Manufacturers have been including more plastic packaging than ever & replacing other materials more than ever for the past few decades. Plastics clearly are an alternative material for which there are already existing, less environmentally harmful materials.

      Plastics are a new problem. Have you noticed how so many more products than ever are made out of plastic? Have you also noticed how many entirely new, useless, &
      • Right, so there are many plastic products that can be replaced, but, when you get into specialty uses, sometimes plastic is the only safe solution. For instance, in some refineries they have to use specialty plastic pipes, so they don't / can't react. Chemicals can need specialty plastics for transportation, and there are other cases where plastic is the only real solution.

        You want to make all soda bottles glass? Go for it! Do you want to replace plastic packaging with paper? Love to see it! But just
        • There are a small number of low-volume legitimate use-case scenarios. So what? They're not what has got us to where we are today. You're objecting because why?
          • What I was saying is you can't get rid of plastics entirely, but, I also said they have to hit hard, to resolve the issues of plastic. Going the traditional route of discussions and good will, won't work, it never has. If coming out of those talks, a serious law imposed shift doesn't happen, then nothing really happened.

            If coming out of those talks, consumer-based plastic is essentially banned, and all disposable plastics are banned, complete with fines against the plastic companies, with required clean
            • You sound like an FBI agent who's trying to radicalise vulnerable individuals into a terrorist plot so that you can get easy convictions.
              • How so? My overall point is that if groups want to cry and whine about the dangers of X, and they would like to solve those problems, they need to do something proactive, not inactive. It could be plastics, climate change, anything else, I don't care, if you don't do something, you can't expect anything to happen.
                • How do you think groups generate a public, democratic mandate?

                  I'll spare you the thinking, it's by crying and whining about the dangers of X... to their elected representatives. That's how democracy works. Do you have a better idea? You know, one that doesn't include eco-terrorist plots?
                  • How are climate change solutions going? Oh, right.... we're doing nothing (essentially). No, I don't have a better idea because I've seen the total and complete failure of democratic mandate in resolving a serious issue. Take Canada as an example, one of the "solutions" for climate change, was to mandate EV's. Except no one seems to have an answer as to how that going to work, being we don't have the power grid, charging infrastructure, supply, or even the ability for many people to buy the more expensi
                    • One example of govt incompetence. Really? That's the best argument you've got?

                      One negative story on corporate media & you roll over like a lost puppy? Obviously, you weren't made for political campaigning. I'll leave you to your fantasies of "Oh, somebody must do something!"

                      I'll agree that the popular public political pressure against plastic particulate pollution (How's that for alliteration?) is not yet sufficient & too many are getting distracted by conferences & committees & the en
                    • I gave one example because it shows the insanity of some plans. If you want a better example, although entirely different, how about medical cannabis because it shows how the government, and government agencies ignore the will of the people. Warning this might be really off-topic, but it shows how you can't trust the government.

                      Upfront, this is off-topic, and I'm not the only one making demands, reaching out to MP's / MPP's, I'm one link in a chain of hundreds of people who want the same stuff. What do
                    • OK, never mind. It looks like you have other things on your mind.
                    • Going back to my overall point, we keep having major problems, identifying solutions well before they become major, and then wait until it's too late, to do nothing, and act surprised. So, if you don't act on this plastic issue, hard and immediately, it will go nowhere, and nothing will get done. I don't have a plan on how to do that with any legal rational framework, since those never really exist to solve issues or develop useful regulation (hence my long post about cannabis)
                    • Headline: "Person who is very, very interested in cannabis complains that people aren't active enough and don't get out to campaign for environmental issues."
                    • What does it matter if the complaint is cannabis? It could be anything that is a serious issue, the point is you can't do, nothing, and expect something to happen, and the worse you can do, is try and use democratic mandate because governments are just stuck cogs in a malfunctioning machine. Again, seriously, look up the CBC Canada EV plan, on YouTube, you'll get a perfect example of a lot of hand waving, but no action and no plan.

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bLufYAsZI8

                      I gave a cannabis example bec

      • I am not a gourmet chef; I will admit to buying instant mashed potatoes fairly often.

        They used to come in a cardboard box with two paper-ish (waxed maybe?) sachets. I went to buy some today and now they're in a thick plastic packet.

        WHY? It's absolutely unnecessary, the old packaging worked and was a 1000x more recyclable. Unnecessary plastic packaging ought to be a criminal offence.

  • Simple solution, obviously it wont clear the environment of the stuff, but if it's inside people and animals we'll filter it out eventually Plastic in cars, computers, and other things are nice. But I don't think we can justify coke bottles, and food containers when we have glass, paper, and wood

    • Nothing simple about it. Every substitute for plastic has its own benefits--and drawbacks. Every substitute requires an entirely new supply chain, manufacturing process, and packaging process. Every substitute is more costly than plastic, this is the primary driver for widespread use of plastics. Glass bottles easily break and require more careful handling. Wood and paper can't be used for liquids or moist goods.

      Would it be possible to come up with more environmentally friendly substitutes? Maybe. But it's

Slashdot Top Deals

Children begin by loving their parents. After a time they judge them. Rarely, if ever, do they forgive them. - Oscar Wilde

Close