Running Head: PLASTIC POLLUTION & THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT 1

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment

Kendra J. Stefanski

Seton Hall University

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 2

Abstract

This paper explores available research on the current state of plastic pollution and its

effects on the marine environment and species. The literature reviewed includes results of field

studies, professional journals, reports published by environmental groups, a news article, and two

viewpoint articles calling for specific policy changes. This review will not explore articles or

literature published by government agencies. All sources reviewed point to the need for

significant and immediate change in controlling plastic pollution and stemming its effects on our

marine environment. Recent media attention and reaction to Australian journalist Craig

Leeson’s documentary A Plastic Ocean (2016) have focused a spotlight on this issue. As a

result, the availability of sources on the subject are plentiful; those selected for review give an

overview of the problem, its causes, and its effects.

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 3

Our society relies heavily upon the convenience of plastic products. Barnes, Galgani,

Thompson, & Barlaz (2009) explain the important role of plastics by stating, "Due to their

inexpensive, lightweight and durable properties, plastics hold a highly prevalent place in

contemporary society with extensive commercial, industrial, medicinal and municipal

applications” (as cited in Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016, p. 8). Single-use plastics give us

sanitary conditions for food, beverages, and medical supplies. However, single-use plastics are

contaminating our environment because they are disposable but difficult to degrade.

Globally, we produce 300 million tons of plastic annually, and approximately half of

these products are disposed of after a single-use (Xanthos & Walker, 2017). One-fifth of all

disposable, solid waste is manufactured from synthetic polymers that are barely degradable

(Rujnic-Sokele & Pilipovic, 2017). These practically permanent items find their way to landfills

or incinerators. Rujnic-Sokele and Pilipovic (2017) report that “the European Union (EU) sent

30.8% of the total recoverable plastics in household waste (8 million tonnes annually) to landfill

in 2015” (p. 136). Cleaning up litter is an expensive problem for cities, as well. According to a

study by Charles Axelsson (2017), in order to control and remove litter, England and the US

spend £1 billion and $11 billion annually respectively. And, according to a joint report by Ocean

Conservancy and the McKinsey Center for Business and Environment (2015) this problem is

only projected to grow over the next ten years, particularly in areas where waste management

systems are new or underdeveloped.

Plastic Pollution and the Marine Environment

For the most part, plastic waste is contained in landfills; however, “plastic leakage”

causes large amounts of debris to enter the marine environment due to insufficient treatment

facilities, accidental and illegal dumping, and littering (Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016).
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 4

Extreme events such as floods, landslides, and tsunamis carry additional unexpected deposits of

litter into the ocean (Axelsson, 2017). According to Axelsson’s study (2017), coastal activities

such as beachgoing and boating indirectly result in large amounts of litter; in fact, during the

2002 International Coastal Cleanup, 58% of the debris collected was attributed to such

recreational pursuits.

In their study which reviewed the behaviors of microplastics in the marine environment,

Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li (2016) found that sixty to eighty percent of marine litter is plastic

debris and, because of its durable qualities, that plastic waste is estimated to remain in our

environment for hundreds to thousands of years. Because of powerful ocean currents, plastic

pollution is a pervasive problem affecting all areas of the globe, regardless of population or

remoteness; it also affects all depths of the ocean from shallow coastlines to the deep sea (Wang,

Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016). In the joint report entitled Stemming the Tide: Land-based

strategies for a plastic-free ocean, the reader is warned that “unless steps are taken to manage

this waste properly, by 2025 the ocean could contain one ton of plastic for every three tons of

finfish—an unthinkable outcome” (Ocean Conservancy and McKinsey Center for Business and

Environment, 2015, p. 3).

Macroplastics and Microplastics

Macroplastics are all plastic products larger than 5 millimeters across (Xanthos &

Walker, 2017). The most common of these products in the marine environment are plastic bags,

food and beverage packaging, and discarded fishing equipment (Barnes, Galgani, Thompson, &

Barlaz, 2009). According to Barnes, Galgani, Thompson, and Barlaz (2009), until the 1990’s,

the amount of macroplastic debris in the northern hemisphere was increasing. Recently,

quantities seem to have leveled off, but it is possible that large amounts of plastic have begun to
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 5

descend deeper into the ocean. Because of ocean currents, winds, tides, and storms, it is difficult

to track the movement of macroplastic in the environment (Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016).

One might expect plastic to degrade more quickly in water; however, due to lower

temperatures and lack of UV light exposure, plastics decompose more slowly in the ocean

(Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016). Rather than biodegrading in the ocean, plastics fragment or

break into smaller pieces due to physical abrasion from waves and sand (Xanthos & Walker,

2017). These plastic pieces smaller than 5 millimeters in size which are created from the

fragmentation of macroplastics are called secondary microplastics. Primary microplastics

consist of microbeads from health and beauty products such as cleansers and cosmetics as well

as the by-products from manufacturing large plastic items (Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016).

According Barnes, Galgani, Thompson, & Barlaz (2009), “it has also been suggested that plastic

waste is deliberately being shredded into fragments to conceal and discard at sea” (p. 1996).

Regardless of the source, recent studies suggest that microplastics may pose a more

signficant threat to the marine environment than macroplastic waste for a number of reasons

(Xanthos & Walker, 2017). Microplastics contain chemical contaminants such as heavy metals

and pesticides; also, when large amounts of microplastics mix with beach sediments, it can

change the properties of a habitat enough to interfere with nesting and reproductive habits

(Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016). Finally, when animals and organisms ingest microplastics,

these materials and their chemical properties have the potential to travel through the food chain,

causing harm along the way (Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li, 2016).

The Economic Impact of Marine Plastic Pollution

Wang, Tan, Peng, Qiu, & Li (2016) conservatively estimate that $13 billion worth of

financial damage is done to our marine ecosystems each year, though it is difficult to assess a
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 6

monetary value to the environmetal cost. Plastic pollution negatively affects tourism,

recreational boating, the fishing industry, and public health (Xanthos & Walker, 2017).

The Need for Global Change

According to Ocean Conservancy and the McKinsey Center for Business and

Environment (2015), over half of the plastic in the ocean comes from a small geographic area

consisting of five rapidly growing countries—China, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Thailand, and

Vietnam, where the underdeveloped waste-management structure has not yet learned to handle

the demands of an expanding economy. According to this report, putting interventions into place

in just these five countries could reduce leakage of plastic-waste by 45 percent over the next ten

years. By extending these interventions to other countries, the impact would be even greater.

When we consider that plastic production is projected to increase from 250 million tons in 2015

to approximately 380 tons by 2025, the need for change is glaring (Ocean Conservancy and

McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, 2015) .

The Impact of Plastic Pollution on Marine Life

At present, there is documentation of 693 marine species having encountered marine

debris; of these encounters, 92 percent were with plastic waste (Gall, 2015). In addition to the

physical changes plastic debris causes to marine habitats, species are at constant risk of ingesting

plastic or becoming entangled in it, and incidents of this sort have increased over time (Gall,

2015). In his report, published in Marine Pollution Bulletin, Gall (2015) noted that entanglement

and ingestion had affected “all known species of sea turtle, 54 percent of all species of marine

mammal, and 56 percent of all species of sea bird” (p. 174). In addition, almost 17 percent of

those species affected were included on the International Union for Conservation of Nature

(IUCN) Red List as either threatened or near threatened (Gall, 2015).

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 7

Macroplastic Pollution and the Threat of Entanglement

Marine invertebrates, birds, mammals, and turtles can easily become entangled in large

plastic debris, or macroplastics, such as discarded fishing rope and nets from commercial fishing

activity (Xanthos & Walker, 2017). According to Gregory (2009), “many animals…find it

difficult to escape entanglement and are doomed to drown or die from injury, starvation, and

general debilitation” (p. 2014). Gall (2015) adds suffocation, lacerations, and an inability to

avoid predators, and Xanthos and Walker (2017) include infection and the reduced ability to

reproduce on the list of threats to marine species as a result of entanglement.

Plastic Pollution and the Threat of Ingestion

Microplastics carry their own threat, as they are easily and often ingested by a wide range

of marine species. Ingestion is more difficult to detect and study, as post-mortem dissection is

often necessary to examine its full effects; necropsy reveals such effects as starvation due to gut

obstruction or a false feeling of satiation and high levels of toxicity due to the absorption of

chemicals from attempting to digest plastic debris (Gall, 2015).

What is clear is the impact of microplastics is widespread, affecting nearly 700 species

from zooplankton to whales, including fish being caught for human consumption (Xanthos &

Walker, 2017). According to Rochman, et al. (2013), as plastic breaks down into smaller

fragments, it is more likely to affected food webs. Ingested plastic enters cells and tissues over

time, leaching hormone-like chemicals. These chemicals “can disrupt physiological processess,

such as cell-division and immunity, causing disease or reducing organisms’ ability to escape

from predators and reproduce” (Rochman, et al., 2013, p.170). Highly-concentrated amounts of

these chemicals such as pesticides and organic pollutants are found on plastic waste; many of
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 8

these chemicals are considered “priority pollutants” regulated by the Environmental Protection

Agency due to their toxicity (Rochman, et al., 2013).

Ingestion and the sea turtle population. For years, sea turtles have drawn international

attention to potential threats that affect marine environments (Matiddia, et al., 2017). One

particular study selected loggerhead sea turtles for “monitoring the amount and composition of

litter ingested by marine animals” (Matiddia, et al., 2017, p. 199). According to the study, sea

turtles are particularly at risk of both micro- and macro-plastic ingestion due to the fact that,

throughout the stages of their lives, they feed at different sea levels. Juveniles feed at the sea

surface while adults often feed at the sea bottom. Twenty-seven percent of the loggerhead turtles

studied had a higher than average than average amount of plastic in their gastrointestinal

systems; 64% had more grams of plastic than food in their systems (Matiddia, et al., 2017).

Turtles, as well as other marine vertebrates, often “feed on” plastic debris such as semi-inflated,

floating plastic bags which they can mistake for jellyfish (Gregory, 2009). By spotlighting the

plight of the sea turtle, researchers and environmental groups hope to draw public attention and

support of efforts to control global plastic pollution.

The Impact of Transport of Non-Indigenous Species (NIS) on the Marine Enviroment

Recent research shows evidence that organisms have begun to use plastic debris and ocean

currents as a “raft,” allowing their travel over great distances (Gall, 2015). According to a study

conducted by Miralles, Gomez-Agenjo, Reyon-Vina, & Gyrgaite, 2018, “floating marine litter

moves with the currents and can be a vector for regional dispersal of invasive species arriving to

ports” (p. 12). Therefore, litter is promoting the spread of non-indigneous species (NIS) by

offering new surfaces for transport and colonization. According to the study, the spread of a NIS

to a new habitat can be the cause of severe environmental and economic damage. The negative
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 9

impact on the endemic species ranges from unnatural competition for resources to extinction in

extreme cases (Miralles, Gomez-Agenjo, Reyon-Vina, & Gyrgaite, 2018). This is a particular

threat to remote, pristine environments such as the shallow marine waters surrounding

Antarctica; therefore, the need for management of aggressive invasive species in imminent in

order to protect our last few uninhabited frontiers (Gregory, 2009). Though scientists agree that

this is a serious concern, data on the effects of NIS is scarce and concentrate on relatively few,

more highly populated regions of the world such as the Mediterranean Sea (Miralles, Gomez-

Agenjo, Reyon-Vina, & Gyrgaite, 2018).

Reducing the Impact of Plastic Pollution

According to Rochman, et al. (2013), at our current rate of production, we will introduce

another 33 billion tons of plastic products by 2050, enough to fill 2.75 billion garbage trucks.

The policies for managing this abundance of plastic refuse are outdated, threatening the health of

both humans and animals (Rochman, et al., 2013). Staggering statistics and shocking research

demonstrate a need for action on global, national, local, and personal levels.

One Idea for Global Change

Currently, plastics are classified as solid waste, therefore, falling into the same category

as grass clippings or food scraps (Rochman, et al., 2013). However, unlike the organic forms of

waste, plastic is difficult to recycle and is manufactured from potentially hazardous materials. If

just four type of plastic—PVC, polystyrene, polyurethan, and polycarbonate—were classified as

hazardous waste and replaced with safer, reusable materials, it is possible that plastic production

could be reduced to just 4 billion tons by 2025 (Rochman, et al., 2013).

In an editorial article in a February 2013 issue of Nature magazine, Chelsea M.

Rochman, Mark Browne, and their colleagues made the following statement: “We believe that if
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 10

countries classified the most harmful plastics as hazardous [waste],…environmental agencies

would have the power to restore affected habitats and prevent more dangerous debris from

accumulating” (p. 169). By changing the waste classification for these plastic products,

government funding would be available to clean up affected habitats. For example, the EPA

would receive funding to clear plastic debris from land, freshwater, and marine habitat that fall

under the United States’ jurisdiction (Rochman, et al., 2013). The authors point to history to

show how effective this change could be:

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and persistent organic pollutants were reclassified as

hazardous under the Montreal Protocol in 1989 and the Stockholm Convention in 2004,

respectively. This led, in each case, to nearly 200 countries stopping the production of

some 30 dangerous chemical groups and replacing them with safer ones. For CFCs, all

production stopped within seven years. (Rochman, et al., 2013, p. 170)

While the proposed intervention has the potential to make a global impact on plastic pollution, it

requires international support.

National and Regional Policies: Bans, Restrictions, and Interventions

A number of attempts to prevent and manage plastic pollution and marine debris have

been made around the globe. Xanthos & Walker (2017) explain The Honolulu Strategy, a plan

which outlines intervention that can be adapted to the needs of a particular region. One part of

the plan focuses on using economic variables, or market-based instruments, such as fees or taxes

on single-use plastic bags. A second part of the plan suggests the creation of policies,

regulations, bans, and legislation to reduce marine debris. The Honolulu Strategy lays the

groundwork for regions that are looking for ways to reduce their impact on marine plastic

pollution.
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 11

In June 2018, Canada hosted the 44th G7 Summit, a meeting of the seven most powerful

industrialized countries. The previous year, Prime Minister Trudeau announced five themes for

the summit, including “working together on climate change, oceans, and clean energy” and, in

preparation, arranged for discussions of experts centering on the movement toward zero plastic

waste and the control of macro- and microplastic waste (Xanthos & Walker, Perspective: A call

for Canada to move toward zero plastic waste by reducing and recycling single-use plastics,

2018). This focus of attention on the problem by world powers marks a positive step in the fight

against plastic pollution.

Some legislation has demonstrated little impact on reducing marine waste. For example,

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, one of the most

important international marine environmental conventions in history, signed into act MARPOL

73/78, a ban against the disposal of plastics at sea (Xanthos & Walker, 2017). According to

Xanthos and Walker (2017), “even though 134 countries agreed to eliminate plastics disposal at

sea, research has shown that the problem of marine debris has worsened since MARPOL 73/78

was signed” (p. 18). The authors infer that this increase implies a need to control plastic waste

on land (Xanthos & Walker, 2017). It is also calls into question whether the ban is being

enforced properly.

Bans on single-use plastics. Regional bans on single-use plastics such as drinking straws and

plastic bags is an idea that is gaining momentum. In a perspective article offering their opinions

of the direction that the Canadian government should take regarding plastic pollution, Xanthos

and Walker (2018) “recommend that the Canadian government seriously consider a federal ban

of single-use plastics (including single-use plastic bags and other items such as, plastic drinking

straws, plastic cutlery, and plastic packaging)” (p. 100). While a federal ban may still be on the
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 12

horizon in Canada, local bans have begun to take hold. For example, Vancouver will become the

first Canadian city to ban plastic drinking straws. The ordinance includes a ban on foam cups

and restrictions on disposable cups and plastic shopping bag. The policy, which was passed

unanimously, is the first step in a plan to eliminate solid waste entirely by 2040 (Woods, 2018).

Other cities and countries have taken steps as well. The city of Malibu, California voted to ban

the retail sale of plastic straws and utensils. Scotland and Taiwan are planning nationwide bans

of plastic straws; England is working toward a ban on cotton swabs and straws as a first step

toward eliminate plastic waste toward 2042 (Woods, 2018). Countries across Europe, as well as

South Africa, Bangladesh, and India, have already successfully implemented similar bans

(Xanthos & Walker, 2018); studies of the effectiveness of these bans have been encouraging

(Xanthos & Walker, 2017). For example, as a result of a 2008 ban on plastic bags on China, 40

billion fewer bags were used (Xanthos & Walker, 2017). However, efforts in the United States

are lagging behind with only four states taking action in the form of levies or bans (Xanthos &

Walker, 2017).

The Role of Non-governmental Organizations and Non-profit Advocacy Groups

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and non-profit advocacy groups have

experience with creating awareness, educating and involving the public, and promoting policy

(Axelsson, 2017). Russell (2018) suggests the partnering of companies, government agencies,

and non-profits in the effort to prevent plastic leakage into our ocean and waterways. Russell

(2018) explains that NGOs and non-profit groups “offer critical expertise in ocean sciences and

conservation, investment, and infrastructure development” (n.p.). One particular project, called

Closed Loop Ocean (CLO), is in the process of securing $150 million in funding to support
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 13

waste management recovery efforts in countries known to produce large amounts of ocean

pollution (Russell, 2018).

Using Technological Advances to Improve Recovery Efforts

A key motivating factor in recovery lies in finding ways to give trash value. For

individual consumers, Xanthos & Walker (2018) recommend deposit and return programs. On a

larger scale, being able to separate and capture plastic components that can be turned into

valuable products has economic appeal (Russell, 2018). Developing and implementing

improved sorting technology, such as through the use of near infrared spectroscopy, is a

promising area of research; however, even though it is possible, it is costly to put into practice

(Rujnic-Sokele & Pilipovic, 2017). Another innovation is converting plastic waste to fuel

through incineration. According to Rujnic-Sokele and Pilipovic (2017), “Incineration with

energy recovery is…a potentially good option after all recyclable elements have been removed”

(p. 136). Perhaps the most innovative of practices is a form of recycling under research that

breaks plastic down to its basic molecules. This technology can produce raw material for new

plastic products, chemicals for manufacturing, fuels, and lubricants (Russell, 2018). Other

research has uncovered the possibility of using waste plastic material for manufacturing roof tile

or as a substitute for sand and substrate (Seghiri, 2017).

Local Interventions and Advocacy

Cities are encouraged to create policies and organize efforts to regulate their own use of

plastics in order to “overcome weak regional and national level support for laws targeting the

reduction of plastic usage” (Axelsson, 2017, p. 224). Ocean Conservancy recommends that

cities and townships better organize composting, recycling, and recovery efforts (Ocean

Conservancy and McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, 2015).

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 14

Hammami et al. (2017) recommend that municipalities provide “a better recyling

environment and firm regulations to reduce this ever-growing problem” (p. 20632).

Improvements that can be made to existing recycling programs include locating recycling bins

within close proximity to trash bins, offering separate containers for different materials including

plastic, or incorporating recycling containers that can accept deposited materials and return the

value of the deposit to the user (Axelsson, 2017). Axelsson (2017) supports strict laws for

littering and steep fines for those who violate those laws. He warns that, immediately after

implementing these regulations, they should be strictly enforced to encourage changes in habit.

Education and awareness. The first step in changing the public’s behavior is increasing it’s

level of awareness regarding plastic pollution and its environmental impact. For that reason,

incorporting ocean education including the risks of pollution and the importance of waste

management to prevent plastic leakage into schools could be extremely valuable. According to

Xanthos and Walker (2017), “education and behavioural change of children is crucial as they

represent an important source of social influence among their peers, parents, and community”

(p.23). In a survey recently conducted in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), students’ scores

reflected little knowledge regarding the harmful effects of plastic waste on the environment. In

order to spread knowledge and increase awareness, the findings of the study suggested targeting

social media or online games to reach a teenage audience (Hammami, et al., 2017).

By recruiting students and community members to participate in events such as World

Oceans Day, it is possible to raise awareness, change attitudes, and promote positive changes in

behavior. Clean up efforts such as adopt-a-beach programs invite citizens and local business to

take ownership in the process of protecting and cleaning local waterways and coastal

environments (Hammami, et al., 2017).

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 15

The Ultimate Goal: A Closed-Loop System

In a closed-loop system, existing plastics would continually be reused and recycled; new

plastics would only be manufactured when these existing plastic become so degraded that they

need to be replaced (Rochman, et al., 2013). Instead of sending plastic waste to landfills where

chemical leach into the soil, groundwater, and oceans, plastic products would be recovered,

reprocessed, and re-manufactured for new uses. The problem of plastic pollution is a social issue;

society must change its current habits to reduce the impact on our environment.

The Need for Action and Solutions

In order to solve a problem, we must consider its source. By decreasing plastic

production and pollution, we decrease its impact on the marine environment and marine life. The

Stemming the Tide report emphasizes that solutions must be global. “We need a global approach

to mitigating pollution from plastic waste—an approach that considers region-specific solutions

that prevent this waste from entering the ocean in the first place” (Ocean Conservancy and

McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, 2015, p. 3). Of all encounters between marine

animals and ocean debris, 92% of those encounters are with plastic waste (Gall, 2015). All

marine animals who come in contact with plastic pollution in the form of macro- and

microplastics are at risk of entanglement or ingestion. And humans are at great risk as well.

According to Rochman et al. (2013), plastic debris carries at least 78% of priority pollutants

listed by the EPA and, as fish and other edible sealife ingest these chemicals, so do we. For

these reasons, solutions must be fast, effective, and accessible. Left unchecked, plastic

production will continue to increase, and marine populations will continue to fall prey to the

effects of human consumption.

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 16

References

Axelsson, C. (2017). Prevention through policy: Urban macroplastic leakages to the marine

environment during extreme rainfall events. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 211-227.

Barnes, D., Galgani, F., Thompson, R., & Barlaz, M. (2009). Accumulation and fragmentation of

plastic debris in global environments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B:

Biologial Sciences, 1985-1998.

Gall, S. (2015). The impact of debris on marine life. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 170-179.

Gregory, M. R. (2009). Environmental implications of plastic debris in marine settings:

Entanglement, ingestion, smothering, hangers-on, hitch-hiking, and alien invasions.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2013–2025.

Hammami, M. A., Mohammed, E. Q., Hashem, A., Al-Khafaji, M., Alqahtani, F., Alzaabi, S., &

Dash, N. (2017). Survey on awareness and attitudes of secondary school students

regarding plastic pollution: Implications for environmental education and public health in

Sharjah city, UAE. Environmental Sciences and Pollution Research International,

20626-20633.

Matiddia, M., Hochsheid, S., Camedda, A., Baini, M., Cocumelli, C., Serena, F., Tomassetti, P.,

Campani, T., Scholl, F., Mancusi, C., Amato, E., Briguglio, P., Maffucci, F., Fossi, M.C.,

Bentivegna, F., & de Lucia, G.A. (2017). Loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta): A

target species for monitoring litter ingested by marine organisms in the Mediterranean

Sea. Environmental Pollution, 199-209.

Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 17

Miralles, L., Gomez-Agenjo, M., Reyon-Vina, F., & Gyrgaite, G. (2018). Alert calling in port

areas: Marine litter as possible secondary dispersal vector for hitchhiking invasive

species. Journal for Nature Conservancy, 12-18.

Ocean Conservancy and McKinsey Center for Business and Environment. (2015). Stemming the

tide: Land-based strategies for a plastic-free ocean. McKinsey & Company and Ocean

Conservancy.

Rochman, C. M., Browne, M. A., Halpern, B. S., Hentschel, B. T., Hoh, E., Karapanagioti, H.

K., . . . Thompson, R. C. (2013). Policy: Classify plastic waste as hazardous. Nature:

International Journal of Science, 169-171.

Rujnic-Sokele, M., & Pilipovic, A. (2017). Challenges and opportunities of biodegradable

plastics: A mini review. Waste Management and Research, 132.

Russell, S. (2018, April 13). Earth Day 2018: To Fix Plastic Pollution, We Need to Solve the

Right Problem. Retrieved from American Chemistry Matters: A Blog of the American

Chemistry Council : https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2018/04/earth-day-2018-solve-

the-right-problem-to-fix-plastic-pollution/

Seghiri, M. (2017). The possibility of making a composite material from waste plastic. Energy

Procedia, 163-169.

Wang, J., Tan, Z., Peng, J., Qiu, Q., & Li, M. (2016). The behaviors of microplastics in the

marine environment. Marine Environmental Research, 7-17.

Woods, M. (2018, May 17). Vancouver to be first major Canadian city to ban plastic straws.

Retrieved from The Globe and Mail: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-

columbia/article-vancouver-to-be-first-major-canadian-city-to-ban-plastic-straws/
Plastic Pollution & the Marine Environment 18

Xanthos, D., & Walker, T. R. (2017). International policies to reduce plastic marine pollution

from single-use plastics (plastic bags and microbeads): A review. Marine Pollution

Bulletin, 17-26.

Xanthos, D., & Walker, T. R. (2018). Perspective: A call for Canada to move toward zero plastic

waste by reducing and recycling single-use plastics. Resources, Conservation, and

Recycling, 99-100.