Could the Next Pandemic be Caused by Plastic Waste?
The defining issue of our anthropocenic era is without doubt ecological in nature; to what extent is human action adversely affecting the natural world we inhabit? What can be done to reverse the accelerating contamination of our planet with synthetic materials? Global awareness about the catastrophic effects of greenhouse gases on the atmosphere and plastic waste on the environment has increased tenfold as governments fight to implement worldwide climate action strategies to tackle the growing threat of an ecological catastrophe.
One of the most serious threats is pollution caused by plastic waste. Our overconsumption of plastic-based products is suffocating our oceans, with plastics being ground down over decades into quasi-invisible micro-plastics that destroy wildlife, even having been found to have entered the food chain. Around 8 million tons of plastic ends up in the oceans every year, maybe more, with 80% of all marine debris being plastic-based. It has been detected in the deepest of sea sediments and on the remotest of islands, as marine currents disperse the waste around the globe, contaminating precious habitats and threatening fragile ecosystems.
It is estimated that by 2050, there will be more plastic (tons) in the oceans than fish. This waste not only poses a serious threat to the natural world, but fears are now mounting that it can harbour the next virus capable of spreading around the globe and once again bringing daily life to a halt through a devastating pandemic.
In face of such existential threats, should industries be looking to return to more natural materials for the production of day-to-day products and accelerating a move away from plastic- or ‘polymer’-based products? The answer seems somewhat obvious.
The Plastisphere: A Plastic Pandemic?
Concerns about plastic pollution and the threat it poses have led to a multitude of scientific studies over the last few decades. In 2013, a group of scientists from the Sea Education Association published a paper in Environmental Science and Technology outlining how multitudes of microbes were thriving on morsels of plastic pollution floating around the ocean, which they dubbed the plastisphere.
“The organisms inhabiting the plastisphere were different from those in surrounding seawater, indicating that plastic debris acts as artificial ‘microbial reefs,” asserted Tracy Mincer of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), who collaborated on the study. “They supply a place that selects for and supports distinct microbes to settle and succeed.”
The term plastisphere refers, then, to all the micro- or macro-organisms - bacteria and viruses, micro-fungi, protozoa, micro-algae, invertebrates, crustaceans, etc. - that colonise plastic waste, forming what specialists call a "biofilm" on its surface. The plastic acts as free global transport network, allowing these organisms to travel freely around the world, posing a potential threat to humans as they go.
“We’re not just interested in who’s there. We’re interested in their function, how they’re functioning in this ecosystem, how they’re altering this ecosystem, and what’s the ultimate fate of these particles in the ocean,” said Linda Amaral-Zettler of the Marine Biological Laboratory, one of the authors of the paper. “Are they sinking to the bottom of the ocean? Are they being ingested? If they’re being ingested, what impact does that have?” Studies are suggesting humans should take this problem extremely seriously.
Another study in carried out in 2016 by two Dutch scientists was even more damning, as they discovered bacteria of the genus Vibrio on floating plastic waste. This family of bacterium includes those responsable for cholera. What is most unsettling is the fact that plastic waste is not biodegradable, and therefore provides a home for dangerous pathogens a much longer period, facilitating global distribution. "Plastics remain in the environment much longer than biodegradable materials such as driftwood, so they are able to migrate much further over much longer time periods," explains Ika Paul-Pont, an ecotoxicologist from the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS).
Plastic Remains a Staple
Despite this on-going environmental catastrophe, industries have continued to turn to plastics for the production of a plethora of day-to-day items, knowing full well that natural alternatives exist, or have existed for centuries.
A study has shown that just 20 companies are responsible for over half of ‘throwaway’ plastic waste. At the head of the list are the usual culprits, oil and gas conglomerates like ExxonMobil, the world's largest producer of single-use plastics, which has contributed 5.9 million tons to the plastic pollutant problem. Moreover, a campaign by Greenpeace revealed company executives suggesting that they had worked to undermine Joe Biden’s latest climate policies, and lobbied against any meaningful action on plastic waste.
Other industries have also been guilty of putting profit and practicality ahead of environmental concerns. The fiduciary industry, for one, has been moving in the wrong direction over the last decade. A few central banks around the world have begun introducing polymer banknotes, extolling their alleged longevity, durability and recyclability as desirable attributes in a world gone pollution-mad.
This, in spite of studies showing that their carbon footprint is up to three times as much as that of traditional paper-based banknotes. £10 Polymer banknotes, for example, release on average 8.77kg of C02, compared to just 2.92kg by their paper-based predecessors. The misconception that polymer banknotes are in fact greener than classic cotton-based banknotes is only continuing to encourage the widespread, dangerous use of plastic in the sector and further afield.
At a time when people are calling for less plastic, some companies want to put even more plastic in our pockets. The assurance of going through the recycling process is only theoretical, as the state of the oceans clearly shows.
While some industries are regrettably going as far as to convert to plastic in some degree, others are doing little to change their long-standing environmentally harmful practices. According to a report by Greenpeace, lost and abandoned fishing gear is by far the largest plastic polluter in our oceans, with over 640,000 tons of “nets, lines, pots and traps discarded in our seas every year.” This floating plastic poses a serious threat to marine wildlife and contributes to the ever-growing plastisphere. “The world’s governments must take action to protect our global oceans and hold the under-regulated fishing industry to account for its dangerous waste. This should start with a strong global ocean treaty being agreed at the United Nations next year,” said Louise Casson, an oceans campaigner at Greenpeace UK.
Ecologists and activists have been screaming from the rafters about the plastic threat facing humanity, maybe it is time we started to listen, urgently…
A Return to Natural Materials?
It might all seem like doom and gloom, but natural alternatives do exist, we do have time to save our oceans and plastics are not the be-all-and-end-all of practical commodity production. The rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic must at least have awakened commercial actors to the threat posed by surface transmission, and subsequently the global hazard of plastic waste as a potential carrier of pathogens.
Some solutions do exist, such as the so-called bioplastics, materials that behave like plastics but are biodegradable. Cost-effectiveness, however, remains the key issue. “The trouble with bioplastic is that it traditionally lacks the strength, toughness and longevity of conventional plastic” explains Dr Ashlee Jahnke. “Alternatives derived from corn or sugarcane quickly fell out of favour because they are between 20 and 50 per cent more costly to produce, and only degrade under certain conditions.”
In spite of the economic concerns, some industry actors are investing in bio-polymers derived from natural based materials that are manufactured with high degradation rates, posing a far lower threat to the environment and in turn removing the threat of these materials becoming pathogen-carriers. Others are extolling the virtues of traditional manufacturing methods, such as the paper banknote.
It is clear that it is time for humanity to return to biodegradable materials. The solutions are out there: boxed water, seaweed, fungi, bagasse… What we lack is political will, it’s surely time to start campaigning
