Millions of tonnes of tiny microplastics have been shed from clothing into the environment over the past seven decades or so, according to an analysis of the impact of clothes washing. Between 1950 and 2016, an estimated 5.6 million tonnes of such particles have been emitted into water and land environments – half of which has been released in the last decade.
“By mass, the amount of microfibres that has been emitted to the ocean is equivalent to about 7 billion fleece jackets just being thrown into the ocean,” says Jenna Gavigan at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Similar amounts have been shed into land environments – much of it directly onto cropland.
Microfibres – tiny strand-like microplastic particles – come from washed clothes, particularly synthetic fabrics such as polyester and nylon. Researchers are only beginning to learn what effects these particles might have on ecosystems, but they can be ingested by small marine organisms, such as plankton, for example, and work their way through the food chain.
Advertisement
Microplastics in general are known to act as “sponges” for toxins, says Gavigan, and are able to transport a variety of chemicals into an animal’s digestive tract, some of which are likely to be harmful. The particles themselves are also thought to cause physical damage once ingested by animals. We don’t yet know how harmful these tiny plastic fibres might be to humans.
To estimate how many of these particles might have been emitted into the environment, Gavigan and her colleagues collected data from various sources. The team considered the global production of clothing, as well as how people use their clothes, estimates of how fibres are shed from clothes when they are washed and how wastewater is treated.
Around 360,000 tonnes of these microfibres are released into the environment every year, the team calculates. “These are very large environmental loadings of materials that will have a very long lifespan,” says Steve Ormerod at Cardiff University, UK, who wasn’t involved in the research.
The team also found that about 90 per cent of microfibres are retained in sludge after the treatment of wastewater. This sludge is often applied to cropland as a fertiliser, says Gavigan. It isn’t clear what effect these fibres might be having on crops.
Buying clothing made from natural fibres like cotton and wool isn’t necessarily a solution to the problem – some of these fabrics are treated with chemicals that contain microplastics, for example. Instead, Gavigan hopes that the increased use of filters in washing machines could trap microfibres shed from clothes. “I personally try to wash my clothes less,” she says.
But clothing is just one source of these particles. “Microfibres are just one part of the microplastic spectrum,” says Ormerod. Microplastics can also be emitted as a result of the breakdown of larger plastics, or from tyre dust or road paint, for example, he says. “In the end, one of the biggest imperatives on all of us is to reduce our impact on the environment by consuming less,” he says.
PLoS One
