Sunscreen and plastics co-pollution “is a new threat to marine life” – Oceanographic Magazine

Report on the Co-Pollution of Sunscreen and Plastics in Marine Environments

Executive Summary

A study conducted by the University of Stirling has identified a significant environmental threat arising from the co-pollution of plastics and sunscreen chemicals in marine ecosystems. The research indicates that a common UV filter, Ethylhexyl Methoxycinnamate (EHMC), inhibits the natural degradation of plastic waste. This report details the study’s findings and analyses their profound implications for several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning marine health and responsible consumption.

Key Scientific Findings

The analysis, led by Dr. Sabine Matallana-Surget, presents new evidence on the interaction between chemical and plastic pollutants.

• Inhibited Degradation: The sunscreen chemical EHMC was found to slow the breakdown of plastic in marine environments.
• Microbial Community Alteration: EHMC suppresses aerobic bacteria that aid in plastic degradation while promoting the growth of protective biofilm bacteria. This stabilises the plastic, making it more resistant to breakdown from sunlight or other microbes.
• The “Plastisphere” Threat: Plastic waste acts as a surface for microbial growth, forming a “plastisphere.” These plastics also absorb other hydrophobic pollutants like sunscreen chemicals, creating a concentrated zone of contamination.
• Co-Pollution Mechanism: The study is the first to specifically investigate how plastics act as carriers for UV filters, compounding their ecological threat.

Implications for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The findings present a direct challenge to the achievement of multiple SDGs and highlight the interconnected nature of environmental pollution.

SDG 14: Life Below Water

This goal is most directly impacted by the research findings. The prolonged persistence of plastic in oceans undermines efforts to protect marine ecosystems.

1. Target 14.1: The study demonstrates a mechanism that actively works against the goal of preventing and significantly reducing marine pollution and debris. By extending the life of plastics, the co-pollution effect exacerbates the threat to marine life through ingestion and entanglement.
2. Ecosystem Health: The alteration of microbial communities on the plastisphere represents a fundamental disruption to the marine food web, with potential cascading consequences for the health and biodiversity of life below water.

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

The issue originates from unsustainable patterns of production and consumption of both plastics and chemical-laden consumer goods.

• Target 12.4: The findings highlight a critical gap in the environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes. The unintended interaction between sunscreen and plastic waste demonstrates a failure to manage products throughout their lifecycle.
• Target 12.5: The increased resistance of plastic to degradation makes waste reduction, recycling, and reuse efforts more critical than ever. It underscores the need to prevent these materials from entering the environment in the first place.

Recommendations and Call for Action

In light of the “invisible threat of sunscreen,” the report echoes the call from researchers for decisive action.

• Policy Intervention: Policymakers are urged to take immediate action to address the compounded ecological threats posed by co-pollutants in the marine environment.
• Targeted Research: Further scientific investigation is required to fully comprehend the scope of co-pollution and its impact on marine ecosystems and the achievement of the SDGs.
• Cross-Sector Collaboration (SDG 17): Enhanced partnerships between scientific bodies, governments, and industry are essential to mitigate these threats, promote sustainable product design, and protect marine resources for future generations.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article primarily addresses issues related to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 14: Life Below Water

  This is the most directly relevant SDG. The article focuses on a new threat to marine life, specifically “plastic pollution in the ocean” and the impact of a chemical from sunscreen on marine ecosystems. The research discusses how this “co-pollution” affects the “plastisphere” and prolongs the life of plastics in the sea, which directly relates to the goal of conserving and sustainably using the oceans, seas, and marine resources.

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

  This SDG is relevant because the pollutants discussed—plastic waste and chemicals from sunscreen—are byproducts of human consumption and production patterns. The article mentions “discarded plastic” and a “chemical found in sunscreen,” pointing to the need for more sustainable product life cycles and environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes, as outlined in SDG 12.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s content, the following specific targets can be identified:

1. Target 14.1: By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution.

   The article directly addresses this target by highlighting a specific form of marine pollution: the “co-pollution” of “discarded plastic” and the sunscreen chemical “Ethylhexyl Methocxycinnamate – commonly known as EHMC.” This pollution originates from land-based activities (use of sunscreen by humans and plastic waste disposal) and contributes to marine debris.

2. Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts…

   The research described in the article identifies a significant adverse impact on marine ecosystems. It explains that the chemical pollution “could be slowing the degradation of discarded plastic” and altering the microbial communities on the plastic, known as the “plastisphere.” This interference with natural degradation processes harms the health and resilience of marine ecosystems.

3. Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.

   This target is relevant as the article focuses on the environmental impact of a specific chemical (EHMC) from sunscreen and plastic waste. The finding that these two pollutants interact to create a “combined threat” underscores the need for better management of chemicals in consumer products and plastic waste to prevent their release and accumulation in the marine environment.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article does not mention official SDG indicators, but it implies several metrics that could be used to measure the problem and progress towards the targets:

• Implied Indicator for Target 14.1: Density and composition of marine plastic debris and associated chemical pollutants.

  The article discusses “plastic pollution in the ocean” and how plastics “act as carriers for other chemical contaminants, including ultraviolet filters from sunscreen.” An implied indicator would be the measurement of the quantity of marine plastic debris and the concentration of chemicals like EHMC found on these plastics. Reducing these levels would indicate progress.

• Implied Indicator for Target 14.2: Rate of plastic degradation in marine environments and health of microbial communities (plastisphere).

  The research found that the chemical “suppress[es] the aerobic bacteria that help degrade plastic.” Therefore, measuring the rate at which plastic breaks down in the ocean and analyzing the composition of the “plastisphere” to ensure a healthy balance of microbes could serve as an indicator of ecosystem health and resilience.

• Implied Indicator for Target 12.4: Level of harmful chemicals (like EHMC) in consumer products and their concentration in marine environments.

  The article identifies EHMC as the problematic chemical. Progress towards environmentally sound management of chemicals could be measured by tracking the reduction or elimination of such harmful substances in consumer products like sunscreen. Furthermore, monitoring the concentration of these “insoluble” chemicals in seawater and on marine plastics would serve as a direct indicator of their release into the environment.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: oceanographicmagazine.com