14 ms·
Microplastics are finding their way into fruit and vegetables as they grow
- 5350-uiop-1130 4y agoit seems almost impossible not to consume some kind of carcinogen, no matter how careful you are.
- NackerHughes 4y agoIsn't it great how corporations can flood our food and water with poison and then brag to us about how they're doing it?
- csmeder 4y agoSomething I don’t understand: Patagonia's stated mission is to save the earth and microplastics entering the oceans is a major environmental concern. However, it is also true that many of Patagonia's clothes are made from synthetic materials such as plastic. The use of synthetic materials in clothing (and each washing) greatly contribute to the problem of microplastics in the oceans. I’m I missing something? Is the above wrong? Or is Patagonia lying about their mission driven approach?
- mjamesaustin 4y agoThey have a page on it here: https://www.patagonia.com/stories/an-update-on-microfiber-pollution/story-31370.html https://www.patagonia.com/stories/an-update-on-microfiber-po... The short of it is that all product manufacturing has an impact on the environment, and they are investing in minimizing their impact over time. Something they note is that the biggest way to reduce impact is to create longer lasting and high quality products, because the less frequently you need to buy something the less pollution you create.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Arbortheus 4y agoSaving the earth is a complex aim with so many different areas to prioritise. Synthetics may produce micro plastics, but then natural fibers like cotton require huge amounts of pesticides and water, viscose or bamboo requires a shit load of chemicals. Carbon footprints for almost all textiles are big. Recycled plastic is a low carbon, no pesticide, low impact material with one downside - micro plastics. Polyester is one of the few success stories around recycled plastic. It’s not like the alternative is to turn your old plastic bottle into a new plastic bottle, plastic recycling is almost always downcycling the material into a lower grade product. Like most things around conservation and the environment, it is complicated and there are loads of stakeholders - biodiversity, micro plastics, chemical accumulation, CO2 and greenhouse gases, deforestation, waste management, just to name a few. One thing we can be sure of is the best thing is to not buying new clothes. In fact this philosophy should be applied to every consumer good. Making things is extremely bad for the environment. Patagonia have been pretty consistent around this point, for example as far back as 2001 they had their “don’t buy this jacket” ad: https://blog.yorksj.ac.uk/jovanalleshi/patagonia-sustainability https://blog.yorksj.ac.uk/jovanalleshi/patagonia-sustainabil... This is the elephant in the room that most consumer goods companies don’t want to talk about. They can make things out of bamboo or produce paper straws or have recyclable packaging, but fundamentally even environmentally friendly products have a huge environmental impact. Ultimately Patagonia’s mission statement is at odds with the reason it or any company exists. Saving the earth isn’t profitable.
- mistrial9 4y agoagree and good post BUT "Saving the earth isn’t profitable" is too simple, and gives ammo to those with different agendas
- Arbortheus 4y agoYeah, I did debate not including that part. I think I would elaborate by saying… Saving the earth isn’t profitable for companies in the business of making consumer products (in most cases). But for companies that make essential sustainable products/technologies and services like wind farms, or various green technologies, or electric car infrastructure, or waste-to-energy plants, or recycling plants, or any number of things we will need to reach net-0 carbon, there will be a lot of jobs and profit to be made while also advancing humanity and helping solve this big problem.
- nonethewiser 4y agoWhat's more sustainable than using fur from an animal that needs to be sheared of it for it's own health? Patagonia uses synthetics because they're cheap.
- bamboozled 4y agoPatagonia also makes clothing from recyled furs such as wool, what's your point? This is of course way better for the environment than virgin wool because...you know why..
- LarsAlereon 4y agoThe flawed premise is that synthetic clothing significantly contributes to microplastic pollution, particularly in the ocean. Plastic pollution in the ocean comes primarily from fishing gear like nets, debris unintentionally released by major storms and wave events, and countries that use rivers leading to the ocean as primary waste disposal. If you want to make a difference to plastic pollution, advocate for sustainable fishing practices, end shipping waste overseas for fake recycling (Patagonia really recycling helps this), and support programs to establish waste collection and disposal in countries that don't have it. Standard sewage treatment processes also capture most microplastic with the solid waste, if you live somewhere with sewage treatment.
- davejohnclark 4y agoI was stunned to read that, in the UK, after carefully separating out the microplastics with the solid waste, that waste is then... spread on farmland as fertiliser, microplastics and all. >In the UK, of the sewage sludge screened out by treatment works, 87% is sent to farms. The microplastics so carefully removed from wastewater by the treatment process are then spread across the land in the sewage sludge the water companies sell to farmers as fertiliser. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/26/microplastics-sewage-poison-land-britain-waterways-chemicals https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/26/microp...
- im3w1l 4y agoI wonder if you could treat the sludge to get rid of it? Break the plastics down with heat (dry, burn, rehydrate?) or some enzyme?
- bamboozled 4y agoBurn it in a high heat furnace and capture the emissions?
- colechristensen 4y agoI was under the impression that the primary sources of ocean plastics were large usually Asian cities without proper waste management effectively dumping significant portions of their trash in rivers and the ocean as well as ocean fishing waste. Sure some plastics get into natural water sources from clothes washing, but how much of an issue is this actually compared to other sources?
- Originami 4y agoRegulatory action is needed - specifically, to ban polyesters from Clothing.
- bamboozled 4y agoI don't think Patagonia is lying, why do you think this ? They make very high quality clothing which lasts a long time, mostly out of recycled polyester, which is of course better than making more sources of microplastics ? On the other hand, I purchased a "synchilla" top, it was absolutely ridiculous how much polyester fiber it shed, like absolutely crazy, I was vacuuming my house constantly. In the end it did stop, but it was ridiculously bad. I should've sent it back.
- finikytou 4y agoIm getting really worried about the impact this will have on our kidneys. I had a tap water filtering on very dusty tap water and the filter was supposed to last 1 year it lasted 3 weeks. I believe it might be a good analogy to how those microplastics are destroying our kidneys
- anonymous_sorry 4y agoI have no expertise in this area, but before reaching the kidneys wouldn't microplastic particles have to cross one of the "filters" from our gut or lungs into the blood? I guess that's where I'd look for problems first.
- nonethewiser 4y agoWhat is dusty tap water? And what kind of filter did you have? I really wouldnt expect much from something you just bolt onto the faucet.
- kornhole 4y agoThis problem was known long ago. In typical fashion like their climate change reporting, BBC reports on this decades too late.
- suyash 4y agoI remember earlier it was limited to ocean and fish were seem to be polluted with micro plastics but contaminated soil in large parts of the world is very scary news.
- andrewstuart 4y ago(reposted comment) I’ve got a bee in my bonnet about “plastic roads”. Many countries, desperate to make use of the gargantuan flow of waste plastic, and desperate to avoid it going into landfill, are putting the waste plastic into roads. This is called “recycling”. Sounds like a great idea until you realize that cars and trucks drive on the roads and grind them into dust - dust containing microplastics. The microplastic dust will go into air, waterways, rivers, oceans, food, plants animals and people. All this is because the environmentalists have decided that “keeping plastics out of landfill” is more important than anything. Plastic roads are an environmental disaster in an epic scale being created in the name of “recycling”. The worst thing is that for some reason it’s not obvious that this is a disastrous idea, and all around the world people are breathlessly talking up plastic roads like its a solution to the plastic waste problem. “In 2015, the Indian government made it mandatory for plastic waste to be used in constructing roads near large cities of more than 500,000 people” https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210302-could-plastic-ro https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210302-could-plastic-ro... Mandated madness. The safest place for the fire hydrant of waste plastic is in landfill, not “recycled” into microplastic dust. Would you like a plastic road outside your house, or outside your kids school?
- suyash 4y agoEvery action has a consequences, these are what we call 'unintended consequences'. It's good that this is making news on BBC, hopefully Governments around the world will take heed and correct this policy.
- switch007 4y agoMy carpet fitter tried to sell me on recycled plastic underlay. They only want to sell it because it’s dirt cheap and lightweight. Zero cares about what I’ll be breathing in for 10 years
- coffeebeqn 4y agoWhat do you think the carpet is made out of?
- suyash 4y agoWow, so no even vegetarian diet is safe from micro plastics anymore. Anyone know if organic food soil is treated with this nasty 'sewage sludge' ?
- majjam 4y agoThe article says so: “ Sewage sludge is the byproduct left behind after municipal wastewater is cleaned. As it is expensive to dispose of and rich in nutrients, sludge is commonly used as organic fertiliser in the US and Europe.”
- colechristensen 4y agoIt never was? Plastics are everywhere. And most of the mineral nutrients in your food were indeed something’s poop at one point. I’m not sure how you want to escape that.
- hinkley 4y agoAlso organic farms use “row covers” to solarize soil and kill weeds by smothering them instead of using herbicide. Those are mostly just sheets of plastic. Sometimes they break down. Plastic hates UV.
- JoeAltmaier 4y agoLots of speculation about how evil microplastics are. I worry it's theatre that's preventing real discussions about real problems. Hey go ahead and disagree, but maybe post a link to some evidence beyond 'microplastics exist'?
- garbanz0 4y agoMicroplastics are so pervasive that they're even found in human breastmilk now. Maybe it's fatalistic, but what is the point of worrying about this on an individual level beyond limiting use of certain plastic products? And it's not just microplastics - we're seeing other news about "forever chemicals," hormones in our food, the global drop of average male sperm production by 50% (!!!), etc. At a certain point, apathy sets in. If this is our generation's mesothelioma, so be it.
- lnsru 4y agoI am absolutely with you. Total apathy. I can’t do anything. My 100% waste goes to local recycling system. I pick up thrash when I am in the nature and bring home. Even left by others. I avoid synthetic clothing and wear only when I really need it. And still micro plastic in the air everywhere. How is this happening!?
- Jarwain 4y agoTire and break pad wear produce quite a lot of microplastics. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412022005451 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041202...
- maeil 4y agoYoure probably already aware but unless you live in a very unique locality with an extremely expensive recycling system, very little of the plastic you put in the system actually gets recycled. Current consumption and wealth levels are not sustainable but reducing consumption is completely antithetical to the capitalist and consumerist society of present day. Buying less stuff, going on fewer vacations, driving less, eating less varied food. Unthinkable to almost everyone, including the overwhelming majority of those who actually recognize the problems and what's at stake, let alone those simply claiming that they do for social brownie points.
- lnsru 4y agoI really hate low quality objects from plastic. Cheap toys for example… They are made in seconds, transported around globe, used for minutes, then break and get disposed. Think about plastic cars with breaking axles or not working water pistols. Even expensive nerf gun from big brand is gone after few months. While some of these are easy to disassemble, other have electronics inside. I agree, that flying and car driving are bad, but that can’t be really avoided. Importing plastic trash like mentioned toys should be forbidden EU wide. And don’t get me started about food packaging. Every 100 gram of food comes with at least 5 gram of plastic packaging. Sadly I must eat sometimes and can’t do anything about packaging.
- Eisenstein 4y agoPlastics are inert. This is why they don't biodegrade easily. It is the additives in the plastics (to make them softer, or color them, or whatever) that are terrible for you. By the time these things are 'microplastics' I am having a hard time feeling scared that they are harmful. I'm not saying they aren't, but until someone can tie them to an actual problem, I don't see an issue -- especially since there is nothing we can do about it. That said, one-time-use plastics are absolutely obscene and need to be removed from society as soon as humanly possible.
- tomp 4y agoThere’s nothing wrong with one-time-use plastics, in countries with good waste management systems. Paper straws suck.
- radec 4y agoWhat's a good waste management system? Honest question.
- tomp 4y agoBurying plastics in the ground; returning carbon to where it came from.
- colechristensen 4y agoNo, burning them in a waste to energy plant. While we still use hydrocarbons for a while for power, we might as well let some of them hang out as our stuff for a bit before being burned for energy.
- 2000UltraDeluxe 4y agoI get that argument, but wouldn't it be better to bury it deep so that the carbon is taken away rather than added to the ecosystem? Sure, small-scale "energy recycling" makes sense, but if everyone did it with all our waste plastic outout then we'd pretty much just be using fossil fuels with extra steps, and the carbon will end up in the atmosphere.
- manxman 4y ago“Between 500 and 1000 each year” in the whole UK?! BBC journalism continuing at its very best.
- mcv 4y agoIt feels to me like this ship has sailed even before we were even aware of it. All of a sudden, all the news is that plastic is in everything now, including our blood, placentas, fruit, etc. And we've never cared much about plastic in our water; everybody knows that water that's spent some time in a plastic bottle tastes different from water from a glass container, but we never had any problem drinking water from plastic bottles. Is this issue really worth worrying about? And if it is, is there any chance it can be turned back? Because it seems like plastic is in everything already. Though we should probably stop producing more plastic for temporary packaging; that only exists to get thrown away.
- Mildlypolite 4y agoI see many fatalistic posts. Of course, saying "we are doomed" is the easiest way to continue to do what we are doing. It's just a defensive mechanism at this point. We should be stopping the production of plastic and replace it with bioplastics immediately. Difficult? Yes. Impossible? No.