Nowhere to hide: Microplastics are polluting western North Carolina watersheds
By Will Atwater
People use single-use plastics multiple times every day — shopping bags, fast-food containers, disposable forks and spoons, sandwich wrappers and countless other items. Given the abundance of these items, it’s not a surprise to find increasing amounts of plastic debris in the environment.
However, a recent study examining the types and origins of microplastics in a western North Carolina watershed found that some particles are also hanging out in the air.
Jerry Miller, lead researcher and environmental science professor in the Department of Geosciences and Natural Resources at Western Carolina University, said his research has revealed that a big source for microplastics is in the atmosphere.
“The atmospheric particles end up in the water, they get into the sediment […], and then they can be transferred up the food chain,” he said.
Miller shared the research earlier this week at a North Carolina Water Resources Association event at Raleigh’s McKimmon Center.
The research focus was Haywood County’s Richland Creek watershed and two tributaries. One of the research goals is to fill in information gaps about the impact of microplastics in freshwater rivers and streams in the southeastern U.S., Miller said.
“We’re catching up with what’s been done in marine environments and coastal environments, but we still have a ways to go.”
Researchers discovered that roughly 90 percent of the microplastics were fibers, with three primary types of plastic present: polystyrene, polyamides and polyethylene. These plastics are used to make items such as sportswear and other types of clothing, takeout food containers, foam packaging and water bottles.
The study also revealed that the quantity of microplastics, as well as large pieces of plastic debris, increased in parts of the watershed that were closer to development, implying that human activity is likely the primary source of the contamination.
But the report noted that “microplastics concentrations were also elevated” in remote parts of the tributaries with limited development, “suggesting atmospheric deposition was an important microplastics source.”
Miller’s discussion of the sources and distribution of microplastics in this western North Carolina watershed comes at a time when efforts to curb plastic pollution have stalled.
The fifth session of the international Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution closed in South Korea earlier this month without a treaty. More than 100 major countries failed to reach any consensus on the terms of an agreement to curb worldwide plastic pollution.
Here in North Carolina, efforts by groups and municipalities across the state to establish single-use plastic bag ordinances have also been stymied as the General Assembly signaled that it doesn’t support such moves.
Meanwhile environmentalists say that recycling — which is what opponents of reducing plastic production point to as the fix for the global crisis of plastic pollution — is a profoundly broken system that doesn’t work.
A growing problem
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, microplastic compounds are fragments smaller than 5 mm in length, roughly the size of an eraser on the end of a pencil. However, microplastics can break down into smaller particles, some invisible to the naked eye, known as nanoplastics. These substances are believed to be able to last hundreds, even thousands, of years in the environment.
Globally, more than 430 million tons of plastic is produced annually. Some plastics break down into these microplastic particles, and a significant amount of them ends up in the ocean, where marine animals swallow them. That’s one way they enter the food chain, according to a report by the United Nations Environment Programme.
In 2021, the United States alone generated between 40.1 million and 51 million tons of plastic waste. Of that amount, somewhere between 32 million and 43 million tons ended up in landfills, according to data provided by Statista, a research and marketing firm.
In 2023, Duke researchers led a study that revealed a possible link between nanoplastic particles and a brain protein that may result in increased risk for Parkinson’s disease and some forms of dementia.
Previous studies have revealed that humans ingest about a credit card-size amount of microplastics weekly and suggested links between microplastic ingestion in people and inflammatory bowel disease. There’s also some suggestion that microplastics can alter how hormones function in the body. A study published in 2019 estimates that humans may inhale 74,000 to 121,000 microplastic particles annually.
“We ingest microplastics all the time,” said Anna Alsobrook, watershed science and policy manager at MountainTrue, an environmental advocacy group based in western North Carolina.
“The more plastics that get produced, the more microplastics we ingest. We are continuing to see more and more linkages of microplastics to chronic health problems.”
‘Culture of convenience’
Despite the mounting evidence that plastic pollution poses a risk to the environment, animals and humans, getting people to curb dependence on single-use plastics has proven to be a challenge.
“We live in a culture of convenience,” said Jason Love, one of the co-contributors of the watershed research and associate director of Western Carolina University’s Highlands Biological Center. “Instead of going and getting tap water, why not get a plastic bottle out of the fridge?”
He noted, “All these things contribute to the issues we’re having now. It’s going to take some deep discussion about what we want as humans and what’s most important.”
Further complicating the discussion about the dangers of microplastics is the fact that they are hard to detect in the environment, said Annika Willis, a UNC Chapel Hill undergraduate majoring in environmental science. Willis is one of several UNC students involved in research projects at the Highlands Biological Center.
“Even though I was aware of microplastics, until doing this research, they weren’t really on the top of my concerns because I was never really visually interacting with them,” Willis said.
“This research is really important to educate the public on the fact that these particles are in our bodies and they are having impacts,” she said. “But I feel like that’s not necessarily common knowledge or knowledge that people want to take into consideration when enacting policy.”
Where do we go from here?
Part of the conversation society needs to have about plastics has to include an economic perspective, said Erin Flanagan, an undergraduate environmental studies major at UNC Chapel Hill. She is also part of the group conducting research at the Highlands Biological Center.
“With a lot of environmental pollution, I think you can’t talk about mitigation and policy without talking about classism,” Flanagan said. “If you can’t afford a nice glass water bottle or to wear all natural fibers, [or ] to not eat frozen dinners in a plastic container every night…”
“There’s the issue of people not being able to afford more safe alternatives to plastic and the influence that plastic companies or corporations that use plastic to package their products have,” she said.
Textile fibers were part of the microplastics researchers found in the Richland Creek watershed. When clothes are washed, they release microfibers and contribute microplastics that end up in the environment and the food chain.
There are some bags on the market that are designed to limit the release of microfibers when washing clothes. One item on the market is the GUPPYFRIEND. Priced at around $35, the instructions say to place “synthetics and other delicate clothes” into the bag during the laundry process. The microfibers are trapped in the bag and can be discarded into the trash.
Want to make less waste? Here are some recycling tips:
- Place empty cans, bottles, paper and cardboard in the recycling container. Keep everything else out. Rinse plastic bottles, jugs and tubs, and empty all bottles and cans of liquids before placing them in a recycling container.
- Do not bag recyclable items for bin disposal. Be prepared to empty bags of recyclables at the Container Site.
- Do not put plastic bags, cords, hoses and other string-like items in the recycling container as they can tangle around rotating equipment.
- Avoid putting other things that could be hazardous to workers who sort recycling — like batteries, needles, sharp objects and food residue — into the recycling container.
- Do not put Styrofoam cups and containers in the recycling container.
- Numbers don’t matter. When it comes to plastic, recycle by shape: bottles, tubs, jugs and jars are recyclable.
- When in doubt, throw it out!
Requiring plastic producers to take responsibility is the only way to create lasting change when it comes to reducing plastic waste, environmental advocates say. They argue that multinational petroleum companies, such as Shell, should be required to help fund recycling programs and mitigation strategies like installing microfiber filtration systems at municipal wastewater treatment facilities.
Given the complexity of the problem, it’s going to take multiple strategies to resolve it, Alsobrook said. Engaging local elected officials is an essential first step.
“The best thing we can do as a society is to produce less plastic, and to start that yesterday,” she said. “To do that, we need policies that limit single-use plastic production and their products. Contact your state legislators today and tell them to enact policies that protect us from plastics and their toxins.”
This article first appeared on North Carolina Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
