By Gemma Muller | Contributor
Plastic waste occurs at all levels of the environment from our front doorstep all the way to the depths of the ocean; it has now been discovered 8,440-metres above sea level on the Balcony of Mount Everest. Plastic has been taken up the mountain since the first summit in 1953. Microplastics (< 5 mm) may shred from explorersÔÇÖ clothes and equipment or may be translocated by wind from nearby cities. Such pollution has previously been discovered in snow from the Alps and the Arctic and is now shown to reach new heights.
Researchers from University of Plymouth found microplastics in stream water and snow at all elevations sampled on Mount Everest, April to May 2019. Levels ranged from 3 to 119 particles per litre, with the highest concentration at Base Camp (5,300 m.a.s.l.). Particles were mostly fibrous material, made of polyester (56%), acrylic (31%) and nylon (9%), used to make clothing and outdoor gear. Lead author, Dr Imogen Napper, said plastic pollution is a key issue of our time and finding it near the top of the tallest mountain on Earth is definitely eye-opening.
Microplastics have multiple potential environmental impacts, causing physical damage to organisms and chemically toxicity from leaching components, additives, and potential adsorbed environmental pollutants. Plastic could also carry organisms to non-native environments, potentially transporting harmful species and even antibiotic resistance. Specific impacts and their magnitude are uncertain, but this research suggests that nowhere on Earth may be completely pristine.
However, alternatives to plastic may not be any better. Researchers from University of Southampton compared the environmental impact of five drinks containers made of different materials and interestingly, glass and recycled glass were ranked the worst. Glass takes the most resources and energy to produce, and mining of the raw materials (silica and dolomite) releases pollution harmful to the lungs. Melting raw materials and used glass requires high temperature, powered by finite fossil fuels, generating greenhouse gases. Even glass itself releases carbon dioxide, all contributing to climate change. Moreover, glass bottles are up to 20 times heavier than similar sized plastic bottles, meaning more fossil fuels are consumed to deliver the same amount of liquid, due to the extra weight.
Plastic is less environmentally impactful, due to its lighter weight and less energy required for recycling. However, recycled plastic is less useful and plastic waste more damaging, with microplastics distributed across all environments as highlighted by the findings at Everest. Aluminium was ranked the least environmentally damaging container material, and recycled aluminium is the best. Aluminium is not derived from fossil fuels and its production requires less energy, generating less greenhouse gases. Recycling aluminium does not change its properties and saves 95% of the energy used to make a new can. Aluminium is also lighter than glass, making transport more efficient. However, mining its raw material, bauxite ore, does pollute water, threatening wildlife and human health.
Even if some materials are better than others, they all have environmental impacts. Clothes and equipment need to be designed to shed fewer microplastics and single-use packaging must be reduced, to diminish synthetic materials entering novel environments.
Add Comment