Plastic pollution has become a significant threat to the oceans, biodiversity, and ecosystems worldwide. Despite efforts to reduce plastic consumption, escalating plastic production continues to increase the magnitude of plastic pollution in the environment. In response to this crisis, the UN-Environmental Assembly (Link) adopted a resolution in March 2022 to develop a legally binding treaty to address global plastic pollution. However, the resolution falls short in addressing toxicity risks associated with plastics.
The article by Alva et al. proposes categorizing plastics as Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) pollutants, considering their long-range transport and harmful effects on the environment. By applying the PBT framework, governments can control or eliminate the manufacture and use of harmful plastics. The article provides scientific evidence supporting the PBT criteria, highlighting the persistence, bioaccumulation potential, and toxicity of plastics. The adverse effects caused by plastic particles are attributed to both physical characteristics and chemicals leaching from the plastic. Chemicals added during production, as well as pollutants sorbed from the environment, contribute to the toxicity.
The adoption of the PBT framework is crucial to mitigate micro- and nanoplastic pollution, reinforcing the UNEA-Treaty and promoting global plastic governance. Urgent policy decisions, along with regulatory enforcement, are needed to cap and reduce plastic production and implement sustainable end-of-life solutions. Equitable interventions and equal access to pollution prevention strategies are vital to address the inequality gap and promote environmental justice in plastic pollution management.
Original Publikation:
Alava, J J et al. (2023). A Call to Include Plastics in the Global Environment in the Class of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) Pollutants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2023, 57, 22, 8185–8188.
Weitere Spotlights
Spotlight November 2020: Nanotechnology in the public perception
In November, we would like to draw your attention to a publication that examines public perception of the safety of nanomaterials in Austria.It shows, that although there is generally a rather positive attitude towards nanomaterials, there are different opinions on safety issues from different social groups. Further clarification seems necessary. Despite the widespread use of […]
Read moreSpotlight February 2021: Nanoobjects in the COVID-vaccine – scientifically correct?
The COVID-19 pandemic induces very different reactions of people on the internet (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7002e1.htm) and in the social networks. Without following the conspiracy theories as “5G nanochip hidden in COVID vaccines” some news as “COVID vaccines induce allergic reactions” should be scientifically recognised. The picture from the 5G-nanochip whose plan goes viral on the internet is […]
Read moreSpotlight June 2022: From small to clever – What does the future hold for the safety and sustainability of advanced materials?
The smallest particles in materials research, nanoparticles, have occupied us intensively for more than 20 years to elucidate and further investigate their safety for humans and the environment. Now, however, the development is going from “small = nano” to “clever = advanced”, as discussed in a contribution by international scientists. Thereby, it is a great […]
Read moreSpotlight October 2020: Nanosafety – Topic of the Future
Research on nanosafety is a driver of innovation as the spotlight in July has demonstrated. But furthermore, this research field is built on routine as well if researchers look for the “needle in the haystack”. In many areas the safety research initiates the development of new methods, e.g. for the determination of nanoparticles within exposed organisms via […]
Read more