RESEARCH PAPER

TOPIC: A STUDY ON
ENVIRONMENT CONSERVATION BY APPLYING
COMPLETE BAN ON POLYETHYLENE

1
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
We, students of Bachelor of Business Administration at Amity University, Noida,
hereby declare that I own full responsibility for the information, results, conclusions,
etc. provided in this report of my internship titled “A STUDY ON ENVIRONMENT
CONSERVATION BY APPLYING COMPLETE BAN ON POLYETHYLENE”
submitted to Amity University, Uttar Pradesh, India for the award of BBA (General)
Degree. We have completely taken care in acknowledging the contribution of others in
the academic work. We further declare that in case of any violation of intellectual
property rights or copyrights found at my stage, We, as a candidate solely responsible
for the same.

DATE:
PLACE: NOIDA ()

2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We Would Like To Express Our Special Thanks Of Gratitude To Our Professor And
Mentor – Dr. Vandana Gupta Who Gave Us The Golden Opportunity To Do This
Wonderful Project On The Topic “A STUDY ON ENVIRONMENT
CONSERVATION BY APPLYING COMPLETE BAN ON POLYETHYLENE”,
Which Also Helped Us In Doing A Lot Of Research And I Came To Know About So
Many New Things For Which We Am Really Thankful To Her.

Secondly, We Would Also Like To Thank Our Parents And Friends Who Helped Us A
Lot In Finalizing This Project Within The Limited Time Frame.

3
 TABLE OF CONTENT

CHAPTER TOPIC PAGE NO.

1 Introduction 5

2 Objectives 6

3 About Polyethylene 7-8

4 Effects of Polyethylene 9-15

on environment

5 Problems caused by 16
plastic bags
6 Why Plastic should 17-18
be Banned
7 Positive to banning 19-24
Polyethylene
8 How to stop Using 25
Plastic
9 Creating Plastic 26
Free future
10 References 27-61

4
CHAPTER -1
INTRODUCTION:

Plastic bags are readily available in the market and are used widely. These are especially
popular at the grocery stores since they come handy in carrying the grocery items. Available
in various sizes these are quite economical and also easy to carry. However, the cost we are
paying for using these bags is overlooked. These bags are costing us our beautiful environment.
Yes! The plastic bags that we use in our everyday life are hazardous for the environment.

The problem is much serious than it appears. Researchers claim that plastic bags are a major
cause of water pollution. These are also responsible for making our agricultural lands infertile
and a cause of a number of other serious problems. Many countries have banned the use of
plastic bags in order to ensure a cleaner and greener environment. India is also among one of
these countries.

The degree of pollution in our environment is rising by the day. It has increased rapidly with
the advent of industrial revolution. The growing number of factories and vehicles on our planet
has increased the pollution level many folds in the last few decades. While the smoke from the
vehicles and factories has polluted the air adversely making it difficult to breathe, the industrial
and residential waste has contributed majorly to the water and land pollution giving way to
several serious illnesses.

Our country has banned the use of plastic bags in many states. However, the implementation
of this rule hasn’t been proper. These are still available in the market. The retailers provide
goods in these bags and the shoppers gladly take their stuff in these easy to carry bags. It is
time each one of us must understand the severity of the issue and stop the use of plastic bags.
Even though a ban on usage of plastic bags was imposed, it has not yet been implemented in
a true sense. Today, use of plastic bags is one of the severe issues that the citizens are facing
in their day to day life.

A polythene bag is a type of container which is made up of thin, flexible or plastic textile.
Most of the cities in India have banned the use and sale of polythene bags which has a
thickness less than 50 microns.

5
CHAPTER-2
OBJECTIVES:
In this research report, our main objectives will be:

1. To study why Polyethylene is banned,

2. Effects and hazardous impact of polyethylene on our environment,
3. Problems caused by plastic bags,
4. Advantages and Consequences of completely Banning Plastic .

6
CHAPTER-3
WHAT IS POLYETHENE?
Polyethylene or polythene (abbreviated PE; IUPAC name polyethene or poly(methylene)) is
the most common plastic. As of 2017, over 100 million tonnes of polyethylene resins are
produced annually, accounting for 34% of the total plastics market. Its primary use is in
packaging (plastic bags, plastic films, geomembranes, containers including bottles, etc.). Many
kinds of polyethylene are known, with most having the chemical formula (C2H4)n. PE is
usually a mixture of similar polymers of ethylene with various values of n. Polyethylene is a
thermoplastic; however, it can become a thermoset plastic when modified (such as cross-linked
polyethylene).

Polyethylene was first synthesized by the German chemist Hans von Pechmann, who
prepared it by accident in 1898 while investigating diazomethane. When his colleagues Eugen
Bamberger and Friedrich Tschirner characterized the white, waxy substance that he had
created, they recognized that it contained long –CH2– chains and termed it poly-methylene.

The first industrially practical polyethylene synthesis (diazomethane is a notoriously unstable

substance that is generally avoided in industrial application) was discovered in 1933 by Eric
Fawcett and Reginald Gibson, again by accident, at the Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI)
works in Northwich, England. Upon applying extremely high pressure (several hundred
atmospheres) to a mixture of ethylene and benzaldehyde they again produced a white, waxy
material. Because the reaction had been initiated by trace oxygen contamination in their
apparatus, the experiment was, at first, difficult to reproduce. It was not until 1935 that another
ICI chemist, Michael Perrin, developed this accident into a reproducible high-pressure
synthesis for polyethylene that became the basis for industrial low-density polyethylene
(LDPE) production beginning in 1939. Because polyethylene was found to have very low-loss
properties at very high frequency radio waves, commercial distribution in Britain was
suspended on the outbreak of World War II, secrecy imposed, and the new process was used
to produce insulation for UHF and SHF coaxial cables of radar sets.

7
PROPERTIES:
Mechanical Properties:
Polyethylene is of low strength, hardness and rigidity, but has a high ductility and impact
strength as well as low friction. It shows strong creep under persistent force, which can be
reduced by addition of short fibres. It feels waxy when touched.

Thermal Properties:
The commercial applicability of polyethylene is limited by its comparably low melting point.
For common commercial grades of medium- and high-density polyethylene the melting point
is typically in the range 120 to 180 °C (248 to 356 °F). The melting point for average,
commercial, low-density polyethylene is typically 105 to 115 °C (221 to 239 °F). These
temperatures vary strongly with the type of polyethylene.

Chemical Properties:
Polyethylene consists of nonpolar, saturated, high molecular weight hydrocarbons. Therefore,
its chemical behaviour is similar to paraffin. The individual macromolecules are not covalently
linked. Because of their symmetric molecular structure, they tend to crystallize; overall
polyethylene is partially crystalline. Higher crystallinity increases density and mechanical and
chemical stability.

Electrical Properties:
Polyethylene is a good electrical insulator. It offers good electrical treeing resistance; however,
it becomes easily electrostatically charged (which can be reduced by additions of graphite,
carbon black or antistatic agents).

Optical Properties:
Depending on thermal history and film thickness PE can vary between almost clear
(transparent), milky-opaque (translucent) or opaque. LDPE thereby owns the greatest, LLDPE
slightly less and HDPE the least transparency. Transparency is reduced by crystallites if they
are larger than the wavelength of visible light.

8
CHAPTER - 4
EFFECTS OF POLYETHYLENE ON ENVIRONMENT:
INCREASING POLLUTION:

MARINE POLLUTION:
Marine plastic pollution has been a growing concern for decades. Single-use plastics
(plastic bags and microbeads) are a significant source of this pollution. Although
research outlining environmental, social, and economic impacts of marine plastic
pollution is growing, few studies have examined policy and legislative tools to reduce
plastic pollution, particularly single-use plastics (plastic bags and microbeads). We will
review current international market-based strategies and policies to reduce plastic bags
and microbeads. While policies to reduce microbeads began in 2014, interventions for
plastic bags began much earlier in 1991. However, few studies have documented or
measured the effectiveness of these reduction strategies. Recommendations to further
reduce single-use plastic marine pollution include: (i) research to evaluate effectiveness
of bans and levies to ensure policies are having positive impacts on marine
environments; and (ii) education and outreach to reduce consumption of plastic bags
and microbeads at source.

Plastic is a synthetic organic polymer made from petroleum with properties ideally
suited for a wide variety of applications, including packaging, building and
construction, household and sports equipment, vehicles, electronics and agriculture.
Plastic is cheap, lightweight, strong and malleable. Over 300 million tons of plastic are
produced every year, half of which is used to design single-use items such as shopping
bags, cups and straws. At least 8 million tons of plastic end up in our oceans every year.
Floating plastic debris are currently the most abundant items of marine litter. Waste
plastic makes up 80% of all marine debris from surface waters to deep-sea sediments.
Plastic has been detected on shorelines of all the continents, with more plastic materials
found near popular tourist destinations and densely populated areas.

9
10
The most visible and disturbing impacts of marine plastics are the ingestion, suffocation
and entanglement of hundreds of marine species. Marine wildlife such as seabirds,
whales, fishes and turtles, mistake plastic waste for prey, and most die of starvation as
their stomachs are filled with plastic debris. They also suffer from lacerations,
infections, reduced ability to swim, and internal injuries. Floating plastics also
contribute to the spread of invasive marine organisms and bacteria, which disrupt
ecosystems.

Invisible plastic has been identified in tap water, beer, salt and are present in all samples
collected in the world’s oceans, including the Arctic. Several chemicals used in the
production of plastic materials are known to be carcinogenic and to interfere with the
body’s endocrine system, causing developmental, reproductive, neurological, and
immune disorders in both humans and wildlife.

Toxic contaminants also accumulate on the surface of plastic materials as a result of

prolonged exposure to seawater. When marine organisms ingest plastic debris, these
contaminants enter their digestive systems, and overtime accumulate in the food web.
The transfer of contaminants between marine species and humans through consumption
of seafood has been identified as a health hazard, but has not yet been adequately
researched. Plastic waste damages the aesthetic value of tourist destinations, leading to
decreased tourism-related incomes and major economic costs related to the cleaning
and maintenance of the sites.

Legal efforts have been made at the international and national levels to address marine
pollution. The most important are the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine
Pollution by Dumping Wastes and Other Matter (or the London Convention), the 1996
Protocol to the London Convention (the London Protocol), and the 1978 Protocol to the
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL).
However, compliance with these laws is still poor, partly due to limited financial
resources to enforce them. Existing international legally binding instruments should be
further explored to address plastic pollution.

11
SOIL POLLUTION:
Soil pollution is defined as the presence of toxic chemicals (pollutants or contaminants)
in soil, in high enough concentrations to pose a risk to human health and/or the
ecosystem. In the case of contaminants which occur naturally in soil, even when their
levels are not high enough to pose a risk, soil pollution is still said to occur if the levels
of the contaminants in soil exceed the levels that should naturally be present. All soils,
whether polluted or unpolluted, contain a variety of compounds (contaminants) which
are naturally present. Such contaminants include metals, inorganic ions and salts (e.g.
phosphates, carbonates, sulphates, nitrates), and many organic compounds (such as
lipids, proteins, DNA, fatty acids, hydrocarbons, PAHs, alcohols, etc.). These
compounds are mainly formed through soil microbial activity and decomposition of
organisms (e.g., plants and animals). Additionally, various compounds get into the soil
from the atmosphere, for instance with precipitation water, as well as by wind activity
or other types of soil disturbances, and from surface water bodies and shallow
groundwater flowing through the soil. When the amounts of soil contaminants exceed
natural levels (what is naturally present in various soils), pollution is generated.

The millions of tons of plastic swirling around the world’s oceans have garnered a lot
of media attention recently. But plastic pollution arguably poses a bigger threat to the
plants and animals – including humans – who are based on land. Very little of the plastic
we discard every day is recycled or incinerated in waste-to-energy facilities. Much of it
ends up in landfills, where it may take up to 1,000 years to decompose, leaching
potentially toxic substances into the soil and water. Researchers in Germany are
warning that the impact of microplastics in soils, sediments and freshwater could have
a long-term negative effect on such ecosystems. They say terrestrial microplastic
pollution is much higher than marine microplastic pollution – estimated at four to 23
times higher, depending on the environment. he researchers conclude that, although
little research has been carried out in this area, the results to date are concerning:
fragments of plastic are present practically all over the world and can trigger many kinds
of adverse effects.

12
Sewage:
Sewage is an important factor in the distribution of microplastics. In fact, between 80
per cent and 90 per cent of the plastic particles contained in sewage, such as from
garment fibres, persist in the sludge, says the study. Sewage sludge is often applied to
fields as fertilizer, meaning that several thousand tons of microplastics end up in our
soils each year. Microplastics can even be found in tap water.
Moreover, the surfaces of tiny fragments of plastic may carry disease-causing
organisms and act as a vector for diseases in the environment. Microplastics can also
interact with soil fauna, affecting their health and soil functions. “Earthworms, for
example, make their burrows differently when microplastics are present in the soil,
affecting the earthworm's fitness and the soil condition,” says an article in Science Daily
about the research.

Toxic Effects:
Chlorinated plastic can release harmful chemicals into the surrounding soil, which can
then seep into groundwater or other surrounding water sources, and also the ecosystem.
This can cause a range of potentially harmful effects on the species that drink the water.

Generally speaking, when plastic particles break down, they gain new physical and
chemical properties, increasing the risk that they will have a toxic effect on organisms.
And the larger the number of potentially affected species and ecological functions, the
more likely it is that toxic effects will occur. Chemical effects are especially problematic
at the decomposition stage. Additives such as phthalates and Bisphenol A (widely
known as BPA) leach out of plastic particles. These additives are known for their
hormonal effects and can disrupt the hormone system of vertebrates and invertebrates
alike. In addition, Nano-sized particles may cause inflammation, traverse cellular
barriers, and even cross highly selective membranes such as the blood-brain barrier or
the placenta. Within the cell, they can trigger changes in gene expression and
biochemical reactions, among other things.

13
Microbeads
Microbeads are solid plastic particles that typically range from 10 micro-meters
(0.00039 inches) up to one milli-meter (0.039 inches).

Numerous countries around the world have introduced legislation to ban the
manufacture of cosmetics and personal care products containing microbeads. Such laws
have already been passed in Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

A Global Symposium on Soil Pollution will be held from 2-4 May at the Food and
Agriculture Organization headquarters in Rome and is expected to be attended by 500
to 700 participants. Plastics and microplastics will be discussed under the category of
“Chemicals of Emerging Concern”. Other examples of such chemicals are hormones,
endocrine disruptors and pharmaceuticals. UN Environment is one of several co-
organizers of the Symposium.

14
ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION:

Among other things, plastic plays a major role in pollution in today’s time. Plastic which
is derived from fossil fuels such as oil and petroleum is being widely used for
manufacturing numerous things including plastic bags, kitchenware, furniture, doors,
sheeting, packing material, counter tops and what not. People prefer items made of
plastic as these are light weight compared to wood or metal items and are also quite
economical. The increasing use of plastic is increasing the amount of plastic waste
which is hard to dispose of. Plastic is a non-biodegradable substance. It breaks into
pieces, deteriorates over the time but does not become one with the soil. It remains in
the environment for hundreds of years and adds to environmental pollution. It goes into
the landfills and leaks pollutants that damage soil and water. Plastic cannot even be
disposed of by burning as on burning it produces poisonous gases that can cause serious
diseases. Disposing plastic has thus become a big challenge today. Plastic bags that
form a major part of the plastic pollution are thus being banned in many countries.
However, merely banning plastic bags shall not help. Ban must be imposed on other
plastic items as well to bring down the environmental pollution.

Plastic materials are everywhere. We use plastic bags, straws and plastic bottles for such
a short time and then we dispose of it. Yet, they remain forever - toxic till the end.

When plastic is produced, it’s made from toxic materials such as benzene and vinyl
hydrochloride. It is destined to be toxic from birth to forever. These chemicals are
known to cause cancer, and the manufacturing by-products contaminate our air and soil.
The type of plastic that is the major source of dioxin is PVC.

Phthalates are another toxic chemical added to plastics to make them softer and more
pliable. It is known to affect our fertility, disrupt our endocrine glands, birth defects and
other health problems. The problem with phthalate is that they are not chemically bound
to the products, so they’re easily evaporated into the air. That new “plastic” smell is the
smell of phthalates off-gassing. Don’t sniff it!

15
CHAPTER -5

PROBLEMS CAUSED BY PLASTIC BAGS:

Here are some of the problems caused by plastic bags:

1. Non-Biodegradable

Plastic bags are non-biodegradable. Thus, disposing them of is the biggest challenge.
They break down into small particles and enter the soil and water bodies however they
do not decompose. They remain in the soil and water for hundreds of years and release
toxic chemicals thereby damaging our beautiful planet.

2. Deterioration of Environment

They are destroying the nature owing to their harmful effect. Plastic bags have become
a major cause of land pollution today. The waste plastic bags are thrown into the
landfills where they take almost around 500 years to decompose. These bags are light
in weight and are easily carried by the wind to places far and wide. The litter caused by
them on the land and the landfills causes land pollution. The plastic bags that enter the
water bodies are a major cause of the water pollution. These are thus deteriorating our
environment in every possible way.

3. Harmful for Animals and Marine Creatures

Animals and marine creatures consume plastic particles along with their food. Plastic
cannot be digested and thus gets trapped in their intestines. Large amount of plastic is
accumulated in the intestines of various animals and sea creatures and results in serious
health problems in them. Sometimes, animals gulp the entire plastic bag by mistake.
This gets stuck in their throat or intestines and chokes them to death. Sea turtles are
especially known to have the entire plastic bag in one go mistaking it for jelly fish.
Research shows that waste plastic bags have been a major cause of untimely animal
deaths.

4. Cause of Illness in Humans

The production of plastic bags releases toxic chemicals that can cause serious illness
among those involved in their production. Food packed in plastic bags can also cause
health hazards. Besides, as mentioned above waste plastic bags cause environmental
pollution. Polluted environment is a major cause of various diseases caught by the
human beings.

16
CHAPTER - 6

WHY PLASTIC BAGS SHOULD BE BANNED:

Plastic bags are a major cause of environmental pollution. Plastic as a substance is non-
biodegradable and thus plastic bags remain in the environment for hundreds of years
polluting it immensely. It has become extremely essential to ban plastic bags before
they ruin our planet completely.

Countries that have Banned Plastic Bags:

Many countries around the globe have either put a ban on plastic bag or levi-tax on it
in order to restrict its usage. Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, South Africa, Morocco,
Malaysia, Bangladesh, Taiwan, England, Germany, Hawaii, New York, Italy, Scotland,
Rhode Island and Maine are among some of these. These measures have brought down
the usage of plastic bags to a large extent. However, the problem hasn’t been solved
completely because the implementation of these measures hasn’t been as successful.

Black market for plastic bags exists in some of these countries and these toxic bags are
still being circulated illegally.

Reasons to Ban Plastic Bags:

There are numerous reasons why the government of various countries have come up
with strict measures to limit the use of plastic bags. Some of these include:

 Waste plastic bags are polluting the land and water immensely.
 Plastic bags have become a threat to the life of animals living on earth as well as
in water.
 Chemicals released by waste plastic bags enter the soil and make it infertile.
 Plastic bags are having negative impact on the human health.
 Plastic bags lead to drainage problem.

17
  Public Must Support Plastic Bag Ban:

While the Indian government has imposed ban on the usage of plastic bags in many
states, people are still seen carrying these bags. Shopkeepers stop providing plastic bags
to the shoppers for a few days every now and then but switch back to them as the
government doesn’t take any strong measures to stop their production and distribution.
It is time we must contribute our bit to make this ban a success.

We, the educated lot of the society must take it as our responsibility to stop the use of
plastic bags and ensure that those around us stop using these too. Here is how we can
support the government in this direction:

 Keep a Tab

We are so accustomed to using plastic bags that it is difficult to stop their usage
completely all of a sudden. In order to be successful in this mission, we must keep
reminding ourselves about the harmful effects of the plastic bags on our nature and keep
a tab on their use. Gradually, we will become habitual to doing without these bags.

 Reuse

We should reuse the plastic bags we already have at home as many times as we can
before throwing them away.

 Spread Awareness

While the government should spread awareness about the harmful effects of plastic bags
and the need to ban them by way of advertisements and hoardings, we can also spread
awareness through word of mouth. We can educate our house help, car cleaner and kids
in the society about the environmental problems caused due to plastic bags and urge
them to stop its use.

18
CHAPTER - 7
The Positives to Banning Polyethylene and its
corresponding By-Products:
Plastic bag bans can be a polarizing topic. Proponents claim they serve a purpose and
do a lot of good, while opponents believe they are unnecessary and not worth the effort.
We have written before about the pros and cons of banning plastic bags before. Let’s
take an in-depth look at the positives of plastic bag bans.

Economic Impact

By reducing the need for plastic bags, bag bans create a need for reusable shopping
bags. This increased demand creates a market for manufacturers to create more durable
alternatives shoppers can use in place of disposable bags.

Impact on Grocery Bill

Many consumers think plastic bags are free because they are handed out at the checkout
and shoppers are not directly charged. Retailers pay for single-use bags and work this
expense into the prices they charge along with all of their other operating costs.

Single-use plastic bags do not appear as a line item on your receipt, but you are still
paying for them. When plastic bag bans go into action retailers

no longer have the expense of purchasing disposable bags. This may translate into lower
prices, or it may prevent a retailer from increasing prices since this savings may offset
other expenses.

Environmental Impact

Plastic bag litter is a major problem. Disposable plastic bags are likely to become litter
because of their lightweight, thin film construction. Some bags may simply be discarded
and tossed on the ground, but if a plastic bag is thrown in an open recycling bin or a

19
landfill a strong gust of wind and lift and carry it away. It is completely possible for
people who have no intention of littering to inadvertently do so.

Plastic bag litter is an eyesore that makes areas look rundown. Discarded bags are a
threat to animals and their habitats. Plastic bag bans stop the litter problem at the source
and prevent environmental harm caused by bag litter.

Tax Impact

Disposable plastic bag litter can also clog drainage systems and lead to flooding. In
turn, the flooding can cause damage and end up being a hassle. To prevent flooding and
the resulting mess many municipalities routinely clean storm drains. This costs time
and tax money.

Plastic bag bans eliminate the mess and trouble caused by plastic bags and means tax
money can be used for other important purposes.

Conserve Non-renewable Resources

Disposable plastic bags are made from natural gas and petroleum; both of these
materials are non-renewable resources. Enough of these resources exist to continue to
produce single-use plastic bags, but this will not always be the case.

Plastic bag bans cause shoppers to find alternative shopping bags and conserve these
non-renewable resources.

Growth of Bag Ban Movement

Bans may be considered controversial, but they provide value. Learn more about plastic
bag bans through the U.S. and the world by checking out our map.

Eliminating plastic bags reduces cost of goods

Stores have to factor in the cost of disposable bags into their prices. By eliminating
plastic bags, stores can lower prices, helping shoppers save $18 to $30 annually.

20
Plastic bags are not biodegradable

When plastics bags become litter, they pollute oceans, rivers, farmlands, cities, and
neighbourhoods. Bans eliminate bags, which equals less litter and less pollution.

Picking up litter costs tax money

Banning plastic bags will reduce litter and allow for tax money to be redirected to more
important areas.

Marine life will improve

Marine animals often mistake plastic bags as jellyfish or plankton, leading them to
consume the litter and become ill or die.

Drainage infrastructures run more efficiently

Plastic litter often clogs drainage systems, causing unnecessary flooding.

Plastic bag bans reduce the need to petroleum

Banning plastic bags will minimize the dependency on the limited non-renewable
resource.

Decrease the mosquito population

Discarded plastic bags collect rainwater and creates a breeding ground for mosquitos,
some of which could carry the West Nile Virus or Triple E Virus.

Plastic bags contribute to climate change

We hear everywhere around us that we need to save energy. It is good for our
environment, health and global climate. But only a few of us realize that each time we
accept those disposable plastic grocery bags at store checkout, we actively participate
in wasting energy and depleting non-renewable resources. Oil and natural gas are non-

21
renewable fossil fuel-based resources and through their extraction and production, they
emit greenhouse gases, which contribute to global climate change.

Plastic bags never break down

Petroleum-based plastic bags are composed of very resistant synthetic polymers that
may take up to 1,000 years or never until they completely degrade in natural
environments What does occur in most instances is that when out in the environment,
the plastic breaks up into tiny microscopic pieces that get deposited in soils (where we
grow food) or contaminate waterways. These pieces can be so small that they are
invisible to our eye.

You can be sure of one thing, though. Even when you don’t see it, these indestructible
particles are everywhere around us, including in the food chain.

Plastic bags are harmful to human health

Microplastics were found in soft drinks like Coca Cola, in tap water, in seafood. It has
contaminated our food chain, so it should not surprise us that it can be tracked in our
body. The reason to worry is that scientists do not know how our metabolism and
immunity will react to the increased concentration of plastic particles in our system.
They suspect that it may add stress on the liver by introducing more pathogens into the
body.

Additionally, plastics in our digestive tract may affect absorption of some important
trace elements (like iron) which we need for maintaining proper health .Plastic bags and
plastic products overall contain substances that are harmful to our health. The most
common are inorganic dyes that are added to change the colour of plastic bags. These
dyes on their own can leach toxins, but they can also be contaminated with traces of
heavy metals such as lead or cadmium, both of which affect kidney health and proper
functioning of other organs. Plastic fragments in the ocean such as those from plastic
bags can absorb pollutants like PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) and PAHs
(Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) easily. These are known to be hormone-disrupting
chemicals.

22
Plastic bags have external costs

Beyond the costs associated with the production and purchasing of plastic bags by
retailers, there are many external costs that are often not considered. These costs include
the true environmental costs of resource extraction and depletion, the loss of quality of
life, economic loss from littering, and wildlife loss. Unfortunately, such costs are
typically not included in most economic analyses, as they are not easy to calculate
because the equation would have to involve many indirect variables.

However, in 2014, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) supported the
first project to calculate the “real” cost of plastic, including adverse environmental
impacts of its production, use and disposal. The resulting number is staggering. Plastic
use costs approximately $75 billion a year.

There are better alternatives available, and jobs to go with them

The very best alternative is a reusable bag. Do you wonder why? The explanation is
quite simple. Reusable shopping bags are very durable and can be reused many times
over the course of their useful life. This means that you are not consuming more
resources every time you need to carry your groceries home. Instead, you are actually
reusing a product, and that means that you are utilizing earth’s resources smartly, while
at the same time reducing waste. For example, a reusable jute bag should last at least 4
years, during which it can prevent the use of 600 single-use plastic bags.

Once a person gets into the habit of bringing reusable bags when shopping, it is not
much of an inconvenience at all. After all, ask your grandparents, they will remember
that during their time people were used to go shopping with their own bags or baskets.

The manufacturing of reusable bags or compostable alternatives to plastic bags offers a

new opportunity to create sustainable products and provide jobs that go with them.

The trend has already started. There are some great initiatives that strive to provide jobs
for women in rural communities with limited possibilities of securing monthly
income.

23
Other governments are banning plastic bags, so yours should too, or at least
make people pay for them

To date, around 60 countries and municipalities around the world have instituted plastic
bag bans, and additional seven countries are planning to enforce the law in the closest
future.

Some countries have decided to do so after directly experiencing negative impacts of

plastic bags, other countries have implemented the ban to reach their sustainability
goals.

Let’s see some examples:

 The first country to ban single-use plastic bags was Bangladesh in 2002 when
plastic bag litter clogged drainage channels and contributed to destructive floods.
 Other country that has decided to enforce the country-wide plastic bag ban after
suffering of negative consequences was Mauritania. The country instituted the
ban in 2013 to minimize livestock deaths. Prior the ban, 70 percent of livestock
losses were attributed to plastic bag ingestion [20].
 In the United States, California has banned single-use plastic bags in 2016, but
the city of San Francisco has locally issued this ban already in 2012 and
consumers pay a little fee for other alternatives like compostable bags or recycled
paper bags.
 Another example of a locally issued ban is Seattle where not only single-use
plastic bags have been banned but also single-use compostable and
biodegradable bags. This measure should encourage people to switch to reusable
alternatives.

For those governments that are opposed to full bans on plastic bags, another option is
to institute a plastic bag tax, where consumers or retailers would pay a small fee for
each plastic bag. This strategy has been adopted by some countries and municipalities
so far and has proven to greatly reduce plastic bag usage by consumers.

24
CHAPTER - 8
HOW TO STOP USING PLASTIC BAGS?
The first answer to this question that comes to everyone’s mind is to stop using plastic
bags, right? Simply, refuse them when offered and bring your own reusable bag when
shopping. These steps are pretty straight forward and depend on your own initiative.
However, we are all too familiar with situations when a cashier automatically puts your
items in a plastic bag before you can oppose it. In many instances, it may seem too
awkward for you to refuse the bag, so you accept it this one time, but you should know
that it is fine to say no politely even at this stage if you don’t want that bag. The cashier
usually understands, only had to do what instructed and what most customers expect
(unfortunately) from him or her. We all are just trying to do our job well.

In countries with a lack of awareness about negative impacts of plastic bags, a polite
refusal might not be met with much understanding. Then, you should try to explain your
reasons for not wanting your products packed in plastic bags.

Most retailers will get your point, but it can also happen that they will not be willing to
sell you some products without placing it in their plastic bags because of having to
oblige with some hygiene and sanitary standards (for example when selling meat
products).

If this happens, there are a few scenarios you can follow:

 You could either discuss with a store manager a possibility of bringing your own
containers for these products.
 Look for another place that does accept or use alternative packaging, such as
small local stores that use paper wraps or compostable bags.
 Or you may need to accept that plastic bag this time and then start campaigning
for a plastic bag ban in your area.

25
CHAPTER - 9

STEPS TOWARDS A PLASTIC BAG FREE FUTURE: HOW TO

HELP BAN PLASTIC BAGS IN YOUR COMMUNITY:

Plastic bags have become such a nuisance because we as consumers use them
excessively even when not needed and authorities haven’t figured out effective ways of
dealing with them as waste. Logically, the key to starting a change in your community
is education. This means that you need to first educate yourself about the problem.
You need to know what effects plastic bags have on the environment and health. What
is the root of the problem (consumers or municipal waste management)?But you should
also consider the other perspective – what effect single-use bags have had on the local
economy and product affordability. You should examine what alternatives are available
and whether local retailers, who often operate with a limited monthly budget, have the
ability to make the switch. By being aware about these issues, you will be ready to
present some strong arguments why plastic bags should be banned in your area and
answer questions of people who will become your ally if you will persuade them about
your good intentions. Which brings us to the second part…

Second step is educating others. Help raise awareness of fellow consumers – that
means everyone when you think about it (unless they don’t shop ever).Communities
with good awareness about negative impacts of plastic bags have been more successful
at enforcing the ban . This is because the customers voluntarily reduce their
consumption of plastic bags, which in turn provides enough time for retailers to find
suitable alternatives and switch to them. Once the wheel starts spinning, it leads to even
more positive changes. The decrease in demand for plastic bags forces manufacturers
to reduce their production and consider expanding in a supply of alternative products.
Additionally, awareness raising campaigns create a social pressure that should inspire
local government and institutions to help in making changes at a bigger scale, like a
regional ban or levy. You as an individual have the power to make a gradual change in
your community.

26
CHAPTER - 10

Reference:

Agence France-PressKenya Bans Plastic Bags. The Independent

[Link]
[Link] (2011)Alami, 2016

AlamiGoing Green: Morocco Bans Use of Plastic Bags

[Link]/news/2016/07/green-morocco-bans-plastic-bags-
160701141919913/html (2016)

American Dental Association, 2014

American Dental Association

American Dental Association Statement on Polyethylene Microbeads in

Toothpaste. (2014)

[Link]
archive/september/statement-on-polyethylene-microbeads-in-toothpaste

Andrady, 2011

A.L. Andrady Microplastics in the marine environment

Mar. Pollute. Bull., 62 (8) (2011), pp. 1596-1605

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Asmuni et al., 2015

27
S. Asmuni, N.B. Hussin, J.M. Khalili, Z.M. ZainPublic participation and
effectiveness of the no plastic bag day program in Malaysia

Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci., 168 (2015), pp. 328-340

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Ballotpedia, 2016

BallotpediaCalifornia plastic bag referendum

Retrieved from

[Link]
(2016)

Google Scholar

Barboza and Gimenez, 2015

L.G.A. Barboza, B.C.G. GimenezMicroplastics in the marine environment:

current trends and future perspectives

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 97 (1–2) (2015), pp. 5-12

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Barnes et al., 2009

28
D.K.A. Barnes, F. Galgani, R.C. Thompson, M. BarlazAccumulation and
fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments

Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B, 364 (2009), pp. 1985-1998, 10.1098/rstb.2008.0205

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Bauer, 2015

B.P. BauerHouse Bill 1185

(2015)

(Indiana General Assembly)

Google Scholar

Baulch and Perry, 2014

S. Baulch, C. PerryEvaluating the impacts of marine debris on cetaceans

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 80 (1–2) (2014), pp. 210-221

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

BBC News, 2008

BBC NewsPlastic bag bans around the world

Retrieved from

[Link] (2008)

Google Scholar

29
BBC News, 2016

BBC NewsPlastic microbeads to be banned by 2017, UK government pledges

Retrieved from

[Link]/news/uk-37263087 (2016)

Google Scholar

Beat the Microbead, 2016

Beat the MicrobeadThe Netherlands is leading; prelude to a European ban on

microplastics

Retrieved from

[Link] (2016)

Google Scholar

Besseling et al., 2015

E. Besseling, E.M. Foekema, J.A. Van Franeker, M.F. Leopold, S. Kühn, E.B.
Bravo Rebolledo, E. Heße, L. Mielke, J. IJzer, P. Kamminga, A.A.
KoelmansMicroplastic in a macro filter feeder: humpback whale Megaptera
novaeangliae

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 95 (1) (2015), pp. 248-252

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Block, 2013

30
 BlockChina reports 66-percent drop in plastic bag use

Retrieved from

[Link] (2013)

Google Scholar

Browne et al., 2011

M.A. Browne, P. Crump, S.J. Niven, E. Teuten, A. Tonkin, T. Galloway, R.

ThompsonAccumulation of microplastic on shorelines worldwide: sources and
sinks

Environ. Sci. Technol., 45 (21) (2011), pp. 9175-9179, 10.1021/es201811s

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Bugoni et al., 2001

L. Bugoni, L. Krause, M.V. PetryMarine debris and human impacts on sea turtles
in southern Brazil

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 42 (12) (2001), pp. 1330-1334

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Bullimore et al., 2001

B.A. Bullimore, P.B. Newman, M.J. Kaiser, S.E. Gilbert, K.M. LockA study of
catches in a fleet of 'ghost-fishing' pots

Fish. Bull., 99 (2) (2001), pp. 247-253

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

31
Cadee, 2002

G.C. CadeeSeabirds and floating plastic debris

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 44 (11) (2002), pp. 1294-1295

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

California Legislative Information, 2015

California Legislative InformationAB-888 Waste Management: Plastic

Microbeads

2015 (2015)

Google Scholar

Carpenter and Smith, 1972

E.J. Carpenter, K.L. SmithPlastics on the Sargasson sea surface

Science, 175 (4027) (1972), pp. 1240-1241

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

CEPA (Canadian Environmental Protection Act), 2016

CEPA (Canadian Environmental Protection Act)SOR/2016-150. June 17, 2016

Retrieved from

[Link]
(2016)

Google Scholar

Chang, 2015

32
M. ChangReducing microplastics from facial exfoliating cleansers in wastewater
through treatment versus consumer product decisions

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 101 (1) (2015), pp. 330-333

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

City and County of Honolulu's Department of Environmental S

City and County of Honolulu's Department of Environmental ServicesPlastic bag

ban

Retrieved from

[Link] (2015)

Google Scholar

Claessens et al., 2011

M. Claessens, S. De Meester, L. Van Landuyt, K. De Clerck, C.R.

JanssenOccurrence and distribution of microplastics in marine sediments along
the Belgian coast

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 62 (10) (2011), pp. 2199-2204, 10.1016/[Link].2011.06.030

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Clapham et al., 1999

P.J. Clapham, S.B. Young, R.L. BrownellBaleen whales: conservation issues and
the status of the most endangered populations

33
Mammal Rev., 29 (1999), pp. 35-60

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Clean Up Australia, 2015

Clean Up AustraliaReport on Actions to Reduce Circulation of Single-use Plastic

Bags Around the World: August 2015

(2015)

(Retrieved from Australia)

Google Scholar

Cole et al., 2011

M. Cole, P. Lindeque, C. Halsband, T.S. GallowayMicroplastics as contaminants

in the marine environment: a review

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 62 (12) (2011), pp. 2588-2597

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Colorado Legislative Services, 2014

Colorado Legislative ServicesMicrobeads banned in Colorado

Retrieved from

[Link] (2014)

Google Scholar

Colton et al., 1974

34
J.B. Colton, F.D. Knapp, B.R. BurnsPlastic particles in surface waters of the
northwestern Atlantic

Science, 185 (4150) (1974), pp. 491-497, 10.1126/science.185.4150.491

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 2015

Commonwealth of Puerto RicoAct no. 247 December 29, 2015

Retrieved from

[Link]/skin/frontend/rd/default/assets/baglaws/[Link] (2015)

Google Scholar

Connecticut General Assembly, 2015

Connecticut General AssemblyAn Act of Prohibiting the Import and Sale of

Cosmetics That Contain Microbeads

2015 (2015)

Google Scholar

Council of the District of Columbia, 2012

Council of the District of ColumbiaSubchapter 1-A. Anacostia River Clean Up and

Protection

(2012)

Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, 2014

35
Council of the European UnionElimination of microplastics in products - an
urgent need

Information From the Belgian, Dutch, Austrian and Swedish Delegations, Council
of the European Union (2014)

Retrieved from

[Link]
INIT

Google Scholar

CTV News, 2007

CTV NewsPlastic bags officially banned in Manitoba town

Retrieved from

[Link]
(2007)

Google Scholar

Derraik, 2002

J.G.B. DerraikThe pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 44 (9) (2002), pp. 842-852

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Desforges et al., 2014

36
J.P. Desforges, M. Galbraith, N. Dangerfield, P.S. RossWidespread distribution of
microplastics in subsurface seawater in the NE Pacific Ocean

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 79 (1–2) (2014), pp. 94-99, 10.1016/jmarpolbul.2013.12.035

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Dikgang et al., 2012

J. Dikgang, A. Leiman, M. VisserAnalysis of the plastic-bag levy in South Africa

Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 66 (2012), pp. 59-65

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Earth Policy Institute, 2014

Earth Policy InstitutePlastic bag regulations worldwide

Retrieved from:

[Link] (2014)

Google Scholar

Earth Resource Foundation, n.d

Earth Resource Foundation. (n.d.). Campaign against the plastic plague

background info. Retrieved from
[Link]

Google Scholar

37
Eerkes-Medrano et al., 2015

Eerkes-Medrano, R.C. Thompson, D.C. AldridgeMicroplastics in

freshwater systems: a review of the emerging threats, identification of
knowledge gaps and prioritisation of research needs

Water Res., 75 (2015), pp. 63-82

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Environment and Climate Change Canada, 2016

Environment and Climate Change CanadaProposed regulations for microbeads

in personal care products used to exfoliate or cleanse

Retrieved from

[Link]
1&offset=5&toc=show (2016)

Google Scholar

Erie County Legislature, n.d

Erie County Legislature. (n.d.). Legislator Patrick Burke introduces law to ban
microbead plastics, gains bi-partison support. Retrieved from
[Link]
law-ban-microbead-plastics-gains-bi-partisan-support

Google Scholar

Eriksen et al., 2013

38
M. Eriksen, S. Mason, S. Wilson, C. Box, A. Zellers, W. Edwards, H. Farley, S.
AmatoMicroplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 77 (1–2) (2013), pp. 177-182

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Eriksson and Burton, 2003

Eriksson, H. BurtonOrigins and biological accumulation of small plastic

particles in fur seals from Macquarie Island

Ambio, 32 (6) (2003), pp. 380-384

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

European Union, 2015

European UnionDirective (EU) 2015/720 of the European parliament and of the

Council

Retrieved from

[Link] (2015)

Google Scholar

Gall and Thompson, 2015

S.C. Gall, R.C. ThompsonThe impact of debris on marine life

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 92 (1–2) (2015), pp. 170-179, 10.1016/[Link].2014.12.041

Article

39
Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Gay, 2016

M. GayNew York City council approves 5-cent fee on plastic bags

Retrieved from

[Link]
plastic-bags-1462485699 (2016)

Google Scholar

General Assembly of Maryland, 2015

General Assembly of MarylandEnvironment - Personal Care Products Containing

Synthetic Plastic Microbeads - Prohibition on Manufacturing or Sale

Retrieved from

[Link]
sb0200&tab=subject3&ys=2015RS (2015)

Google Scholar

GESAMP, 2016

GESAMPSources, fate and effects of microplastics in the marine environment:

part two of a global assessment

P.J. Kershaw, C.M. Rochman (Eds.), IMO/FAO/UNESCO-

IOC/UNIDO/WMO/IAEA/UN/UNEP/UNDP Joint Group of Experts on the
Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection. Reports and Studies
Series. GESAMP No. 93, International Maritime Organization, London (2016)

(220 p.)

40
Google Scholar

Goldstein et al., 2012

M.C. Goldstein, M. Rosenberg, L. ChengIncrease oceanic microplastic debris

enhances oviposition in an endemic pelagic insect

Biol. Lett. (2012), pp. 1-4, 10.1098/rsbl.2012.0298

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Government of Canada, 2016a

Government of CanadaOrder adding a toxic substance to Schedule 1 to the

Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

Retrieved from

[Link]/rp-pr/p2/2016/2016-06-29/html/[Link] (2016)

Google Scholar

Government of Canada, 2016b

Government of Canada

Microbeads in toiletries regulations. (2016)

Retrieved from

[Link]

Government of the District of Columbia, 2009

Government of the District of ColumbiaDepartment of the Environment Natural

Resources Administration Stormwater Management Division. Anacostia River
Clean Up and Protection act of 2009, DC ST § 8-102.01

41
Retrieved from

[Link]
[Link] (2009)

Google Scholar

Hardesty et al., 2015

B.D. Hardesty, T.P. Good, C. WilcoxNovel methods, new results and science-based
solutions to tackle marine debris impacts on wildlife

Ocean Coast. Manag., 115 (2015), pp. 4-9

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Harper and Fowler, 1987

P.C. Harper, J.A. FowlerPlastic pellets in New Zealand storm-killed prions

(Pachyptilla spp.) 1958–1977

Notornis, 34 (1987), pp. 65-70

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Hartley et al., 2015

B.L. Hartley, R.C. Thompson, S. PahlMarine litter education boosts children's

understanding and self-reported actions

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 90 (1) (2015), pp. 209-217

Article

42
Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department, 2015

Hong Kong Environmental Protection DepartmentEnvironmental levy scheme on

plastic shopping bags

Retrieved from

[Link]
v_levy.html (2015)

Google Scholar

Illinois General Assembly, 2014

Illinois General AssemblyBill Status of SB2727

(2014)

Google Scholar

Informal Waste Pickers And Recyclers, 2013

Informal Waste Pickers And RecyclersPlastic bags: outlawed in Mauritania

Retrieved from

[Link] (2013)

Google Scholar

Ivar do Sul and Costa, 2014

J.A. Ivar do Sul, M.F. CostaThe present and future of microplastic pollution in
the marine environment

Environ. Pollut., 185 (2014), pp. 352-364

43
[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Jambeck, 2015

J.R. JambeckPlastic waste inputs from land into the ocean

Science, 347 (6223) (2015), pp. 768-771, 10.1126/science.1260352

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Jambeck et al., 2015

J.R. Jambeck, R. Geyer, C. Wilcox, T.R. Siegler, M. Perryman, A. Andrady, ...,

K.L. LawPlastic waste inputs from land into the ocean

Science, 347 (6223) (2015), pp. 768-771

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Jang et al., 2014

Y.C. Jang, S. Hong, J. Lee, M.J. Lee, W.J. ShimEstimation of lost tourism revenue
in Geoje Island from the 2011 marine debris pollution event in South Korea

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 81 (1) (2014), pp. 49-54

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Katsanevakis, 2008

S. KatsanevakisMarine debris, a growing problem: sources, distribution,

composition, and impacts

44
T.N. Hofer (Ed.), Marine Pollution: New Research, Nova Science Publishers, New
York (2008), pp. 277-324

Google Scholar

Kershaw et al., 2011

P. Kershaw, S. Katsuhiko, S. Lee, J. Samseth, D. WoddringPlastic debris in the

ocean

UNEP Year Book (2011), pp. 20-33

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Laist, 1997

D.W. LaistImpacts of marine debris: Entanglement of marine life in marine debris

including a comprehensive list of species with entanglement and ingestion records

J.M. Coe, D.B. Rogers (Eds.), Marine Debris – Sources, Impacts and Solutions,
Springer, New York (1997), pp. 99-139

CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Law and Thompson, 2014

K.L. Law, R.C. ThompsonMicroplastics in the seas

Science, 345 (6193) (2014), pp. 144-145, 10.1126/science.1254065

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Legislative Assembly of Ontario, 2015

Legislative Assembly of OntarioBill 75, Microbead Elimination and Monitoring

Act, 2015

2015 (2015)

45
Google Scholar

Levine, 2016

J. LevineRemoving harmful microplastics from New Jersey's waterways and

wildlife

Retrieved from

[Link] (2016)

Google Scholar

Maine State Legislature, 2015

Maine State LegislatureLaws of the state of Maine as passed by the one hundred
and twenty-seventh legislature

First Regular Session. December 3, 2014 to July 16, 2015. Maine State Legislature
(2015)

Retrieved from

[Link]

Google Scholar

Mallory, 2008

M.L. MalloryMarine plastic debris in northern fulmars from the Canadian high
Arctic

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 56 (8) (2008), pp. 1501-1504, 10.1016/[Link].2008.04.017

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

46
 Mascarenhas et al., 2004

R. Mascarenhas, R. Santos, D. ZeppeliniPlastic debris ingestion by sea turtle in

Paraiba, Brazil

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 49 (4) (2004), pp. 354-355, 10.1016/[Link].2004.05.006

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Mathalon and Hill, 2014

Mathalon, P. HillMicroplastic fibers in the intertidal ecosystem surrounding Halifax

Harbor, Nova Scotia

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 81 (1) (2014), pp. 69-79

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Miranda and de Carvalho-Souza, 2016

D.D.A. Miranda, G.F. de Carvalho-SouzaAre we eating plastic-ingesting fish?

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 103 (1–2) (2016), pp. 109-114

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Moser and Lee, 1992

47
M.L. Moser, D.S. LeeA fourteen-year survey of plastic ingestion by Western North
Atlantic seabirds

Colon. Waterbirds, 15 (1) (1992), pp. 83-94, 10.2307/1521357

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Napper et al., 2015

I.E. Napper, A. Bakir, S.J. Rowland, R.C. ThompsonCharacterisation, quantity

and sorptive properties of microplastics extracted from cosmetics

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 99 (1–2) (2015), pp. 178-185

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Pacific Islands News Association, 2015

Pacific Islands News AssociationPlastic bags banned in PNG from 01 January

2016

Retrieved from

[Link]/?p=pacnews&m=read&o=769906672566773a3e6998c16d95dc
(2015)

Google Scholar

Paya, 2016

PayaAn Integrated System of Waste Management in a Developing Country

Case Study: Santiago de Cali, Colombia

(2016)

48
Google Scholar

Perkins, 2015

S. PerkinsNearly every seabird may be eating plastic by 2050

Retrieved from

[Link]
plastic-2050 (2015)

Google Scholar

Pettipas et al., 2016

S. Pettipas, M. Bernier, T.R. WalkerA Canadian policy framework to mitigate

plastic marine pollution

Mar. Policy, 68 (2016), pp. 117-122

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Pham, 2014

C.K. PhamMarine litter distribution and density in European seas, from the
shelves to deep basins

PLoS One, 9 (4) (2014), 10.1371/[Link].0095839

Google Scholar

Pilgrim, 2016

S. PilgrimSmugglers work on the side side of Rwanda's plastic bag ban

Retrieved from

49
[Link]
(2016)

Google Scholar

Plastic Soup Foundation, 2016

Plastic Soup FoundationBan on free plastic bags in the Netherlands

Retrieved from

[Link]
(2016)

Google Scholar

Poortinga et al., 2013

W. Poortinga, L. Whitemarsh, C. SuffolkThe introduction of a single-use carrier

bag charge in Wales: attitude change and behavioural spillover effects

J. Environ. Psychol., 36 (2013), pp. 240-247, 10.1016/[Link].2013.09.001

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Raynaud, 2014

J. RaynaudValuing plastics: the business case for measuring

Managing and Disclosing Plastic Use in the Consumer Goods Industry (2014)

Retrieved from

[Link]/pdf/ValuingPlastic/

Google Scholar

50
Rayne, 2008

S. RayneThe need for reducing plastic shopping bag use and disposal in Africa

Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 3 (3) (2008)

Google Scholar

Retail Council of Canada, 2016

Retail Council of CanadaPlastic bags

Retrieved from

[Link] (2016)

Google Scholar

Rios et al., 2007

L.M. Rios, C. Moore, P.R. JonesPersistent organic pollutants carried by synthetic

polymers in the ocean environment

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 54 (8) (2007), pp. 1230-1237

[Link]

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Ritch et al., 2009

Ritch, C. Brenna, C. MacLeodPlastic bag politics: modifying consumer

behaviour for sustainable development

Int. J. Consum. Stud., 33 (2009), pp. 168-174, 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00749.x

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

51
Robards et al., 1997

M.D. Robards, P.J. Gould, J.F. PiattThe highest global concentrations and
increased abundance of oceanic plastic debris in the North Pacific: evidence from
seabirds

J.M. Coe, D.B. Rogers (Eds.), Marine Debris - Sources, Impacts and Solutions,
Springer, New York (1997), pp. 71-80

CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rochman et al., 2015a

C.M. Rochman, S.M. Kross, J.B. Armstrong, M.T. Bogan, E.S. Darling, S.J.
Green, A.R. Smyth, D. VeríssimoScientific evidence supports a ban on microbeads

Environ. Sci. Technol., 49 (2015), pp. 10759-10761

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Rochman et al., 2015b

C.M. Rochman, A. Tahir, S.L. Williams, D.V. Baxa, R. Lam, J.T. Miller, ..., S.J.
TehAnthropogenic debris in seafood: Plastic debris and fibers from textiles in fish
and bivalves sold for human consumption

Scientific reports, 5 (2015)

Google Scholar

Romer, 2010

J.R. RomerThe evolution of San Francisco's plastic-bag ban

Golden Gate Univ. Environ. Law J., 1 (2) (2010), pp. 439-465

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

52
Schwartz, 2015

J. SchwartzBan on microbeads proves easy to pass through pipeline

The New York Times (2015)

Retrieved from

[Link]
[Link]

Google Scholar

Seltenrich, 2015

N. SeltenrichNew link in the food chain? Marine plastic pollution and seafood
safety

Environ. Health Perspect., 123 (2015), pp. 34-41

Google Scholar

Sivan, 2011

SivanNew perspectives in plastic biodegradation

Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., 22 (3) (2011), pp. 422-426, 10.1016/[Link].2011.01.013

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Smithers, 2016

R. SmithersEngland's Plastic Bag Usage Drops 85% since 5p Charge Introduced

Retreived from

53
[Link]
usage-drops-85-per-cent-since-5p-charged-introduced (2016)

Google Scholar

Surhoff and Scholz-Böttcher, 2016

T.J. Surhoff, B.M. Scholz-BöttcherQualitative impact of salinity, UV radiation

and turbulence on leaching of organic plastic additives from four common plastics
— a lab experiment

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 102 (1) (2016), pp. 84-94

[Link]

Google Scholar

Tan, 2016

S. TanErie County won't enforce microbead ban immediately

Retrieved from

[Link]
microbead-ban-immediately-20160211 (2016)

Google Scholar

The Economist, 2015

The EconomistWhat are microbeads and why would Canada ban them?

Retrieved from

[Link]
0 (2015)

Google Scholar

54
The New York Times, 2016

The New York TimesCalifornia proposition 67- plastic bag ban veto referendum
– results: approved

Retrieved from

[Link]
single-use-bag-ban (2016)

Google Scholar

Thompson, 2015

R.C. ThompsonMircoplastics in the marine environment: Sources, consequences

and solutions

M. Bergmann, L. Gutow, M. Klages (Eds.), Marine Anthropogenic Litter,

Springer, Heidelberg (2015), pp. 185-200

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Thompson et al., 2004

R.C. Thompson, Y. Olsen, R.P. Mitchell, A. Davis, S.J. Rowland, A.W.J. John, D.
McGonigle, A.E. RussellLost at sea: where is all the plastic?

Science, 304 (2004), p. 838

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Tomas et al., 2002

Tomas, J., Guitart, R., Mateo, R., Raga, J.A. (2002). Marine debris ingestion in
loggerhead sea turtles, Caretta caretta, from the Western Mediterranean. Mar.
Pollut. Bull., 44(3), 211–216. doi:10.1016/s0025-326x(01)00236-3

55
Google Scholar

Toronto Environmental Alliance, 2013

Toronto Environmental AlliancePlastic bag ban

Retrieved from

[Link] (2013)

Google Scholar

Tubau et al., 2015

X. Tubau, M. Canals, G. Lastras, X. Rayo, J. Rivera, D. AmblasMarine litter on

the floor of deep submarine canyons of the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea: the
role of hydrodynamic processes

Prog. Oceanogr., 134 (2015), pp. 379-403

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

UNEP, 2015

UNEPPlastic in cosmetics: are we polluting the environment through out personal

care? Plastic ingredients that contribute to marine microplastic litter

Retrieved from

[Link]
cosmetics-are-we-polluting-environment-through-our-personal (2015)

Google Scholar

UNEP, 2016

56
UNEPMarine Plastic Debris and Microplastics – Global Lessons and Research to
Inspire Action and Guide Policy Change

Nairobi, United Nations Environment Programme (2016)

Google Scholar

UNEP and NOAA, 2015

UNEP and NOAAThe Honolulu Strategy: a global framework for prevention and
management of marine debris

Retrieved from

[Link] (2015)

Google Scholar

United Kingdom Department for Environment Food and Rural A

United Kingdom Department for Environment Food and Rural AffairsCarrier

Bags: Why There's a Charge

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2015)

Retrieved from

[Link]
why-were-introducing-the-charge/carrier-bags-why-theres-a-5p-charge

Google Scholar

United Kingdom Department for Environment Food and Rural A

United Kingdom Department for Environment Food and Rural AffairsMicrobead

Ban Announced to Protect Sealife

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2016)

57
[Link]
sealife

Google Scholar

United States Congress, 2015

United States CongressH.R.1321 - Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015

2015 (2015)

Google Scholar

Van Cauwenberghe et al., 2015

L. Van Cauwenberghe, L. Devriese, F. Galgani, J. Robbens, C.R.

JanssenMicroplastics in sediments: a review of techniques, occurence and effects

Mar. Environ. Res., 111 (2015), pp. 5-17

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Vegter et al., 2014

A.C. Vegter, M. Barletta, C. Beck, J. Borrero, H. Burton, M.L. Campbell, M.F.

Costa, M. Eriksen, C. Eriksson, A. Estrades, K.V. GilardiGlobal research
priorities to mitigate plastic pollution impacts on marine wildlife

Endanger. Species Res., 25 (2014), pp. 225-247, 10.3354/esr00623

CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Walker et al., 2006

T.R. Walker, J. Grant, M.C. ArchambaultAccumulation of marine debris on an

intertidal beach in an urban park (Halifax Harbour, Nova Scotia)

58
Water Qual. Res. J. Can., 41 (2006), pp. 256-262

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Walker et al., 2016

T.R. Walker, S. Pettipas, M. Bernier, D. Xanthos, A. DayCanada's dirty dozen: a

Canadian policy framework to mitigate plastic marine pollution

The ZONE, Fall Issue, Coastal Zone Canada Association (2016), pp. 9-12

Retrieved from

[Link]
LL_2016.pdf

View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Walker et al., 1997

T.R. Walker, K. Reid, J.P.Y. Arnould, J.P. CroxallMarine debris surveys at Bird
Island, South Georgia 1990-1995

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 34 (1997), pp. 61-65

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Walker and Taylor, 1996

T.R. Walker, R. TaylorEntanglement of Antarctic fur seals Arctocephalus gazella

in man-made debris at Bird Island, South Georgia during the 1995 winter and
1995/96 pup-rearing season

59
Paper Presented at the Fifteenth Meeting of the Scientific Committee of the
Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, Hobart,
Australia (1996)

Google Scholar

Walmart Canada, 2016

Walmart CanadaPlastic shopping bag reduction

Retrieved from

[Link] (2016)

Google Scholar

Waluda and Staniland, 2013

C.M. Waluda, I.J. StanilandEntanglement of Antarctic fur seals at Bird Island,

South Georgia

Mar. Pollut. Bull., 74 (2013), pp. 244-252, 10.1016/[Link].2013.06.050

Article

Download PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Wang et al., 2016

J. Wang, Z. Tan, J. Peng, Q. Qiu, M. LiThe behaviors of microplastics in the

marine environment

Mar. Environ. Res., 113 (2016), pp. 7-17

[Link]

Article

60
Download PDFCrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar

Welsh Government, 2014

Welsh GovernmentSingle-use carrier bags

Retrieved from

[Link]
arrierbags/?lang=en (2014)

Google Scholar

Zero Waste Scotland, 2014

Zero Waste ScotlandCarrier bag charge Scotland

Retrieved from

[Link] (2014)

61