Five hotspots where floating plastic litter poses the greatest risk to North Atlantic marine life – new study

Spread the love
So much ocean plastic originates from sources on land, but once floating in the sea it poses a risk to marine wildlife and habitats.
Rich Carey/Shutterstock

Samantha Garrard, Plymouth Marine Laboratory

Plastic has been found in every single part of the ocean, from the surface to the seafloor and from the tropics to the poles. Land-based sources of plastic account for the majority of this pollution, with plastic bags, bottles, wrappers, food containers and cutlery among the most common items found.

These items are often buoyant and float on the sea surface. As they travel long distances, they get pushed by the wind, waves and currents. This means they have the potential to cause harm far beyond the country from which they originated. For example, land-based plastic waste from Indonesia has been shown to travel over 4,000km to the Seychelles.

As it travels, plastic litter can cause harm to wildlife. Megafauna (large marine animals) can eat or become entangled in it. Consuming plastic litter can block or damage the gastrointestinal tract of animals, causing significant health impacts or death.

While ghost fishing gear (lost fishing nets that float freely) is the most common entanglement threat to marine megafauna, they can also become entangled in land-sourced plastics such as plastic bags, frisbees, potato nets, elastic bands and other circular plastics. This can cause severe trauma to the animal, and in some cases entanglement causes death.

If plastic is transported towards the shore, it can get caught or lodged in shallow environments where it can entangle or cover plant or animal habitats, causing damage. Plastic entanglement can cause breakage, and if it covers a habitat it will restrict access to food or light.

At Plymouth Marine Laboratory, our team of marine researchers have developed a risk assessment approach to understand where this plastic litter could cause the most harm in the North Atlantic, and which countries that plastic originated from. Our research highlighted five areas of high risk – the US Atlantic, the US Gulf of Mexico, the UK, French Atlantic and Portuguese Azores.

Reducing risk

In our new study, we assessed the risk of land-sourced plastic litter to marine megafauna. That includes seabirds, whales and dolphins, seals and sea lions, manatees and dugongs, sharks and rays, tuna and billfish. We also assessed the risk to shallow water habitats including coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass beds, saltmarsh and kelp seaweed beds.

Using a particle tracking model, we tracked the flow of buoyant plastic litter released from the rivers of 16 countries bordering the North Atlantic between 2000 and 2015 using the most recent data available. Billions of virtual particles were released at the mouths of the rivers each month, with surface currents and wind used to drive their movement. After 15 years of tracking, our model showed us where plastic was likely to accumulate.

We also assessed the vulnerability of each of the megafauna groups and shallow water habitats to this plastic. For marine megafauna, we developed vulnerability scores by quantifying the amount of scientific evidence of ingestion or entanglement in land-sourced plastic. For habitats, we developed vulnerability scores by quantifying the scientific evidence available for this plastic causing harm by entanglement or smothering.

Blue sea, green turtle swimming with fishing net attached behind it
Marine wildlife such as this green sea turtle can become entangled in ghost fishing gear that is left floating in the sea.
Mohamed Abdulraheem/Shutterstock

To assess risk, we mapped the vulnerability and distribution of each megafauna group or habitat against the abundance of plastic. Each point within the map was given a risk score from zero to five. The greatest risk occurred in areas where high numbers of vulnerable megafauna or habitats overlapped with high concentrations of plastic.

Managing the plastic problem

We found that much of the modelled plastic litter causing risk in the UK originated from UK rivers. In other high-risk zones such as the Azores and the US Gulf of Mexico, plastic primarily originated from other regions. More than 99% of plastic litter in the Azores was estimated to come from the other countries, mainly Caribbean islands and the US.

The potential of this plastic to travel vast distances across the ocean makes management of this pollutant particularly difficult. More than 90% of plastic waste in the Dominican Republic and Haiti are estimated to be mismanaged. This waste has the potential to cause ecological harm across both sides of the Atlantic.

UN member nations have agreed to forge an international legally binding agreement to tackle plastic pollution, called the Global Plastics Treaty, with negotiations expected to be completed by the end of this year. This study highlights the importance of the treaty in ensuring international cooperation to reduce plastic consumption and waste, including the provision of financial support to help lower-income nations such as the Caribbean islands implement measures. Identification of high-risk zones will also help prioritise areas where interventions and monitoring should be targeted.

Even if all plastic intervention measures are implemented, it is likely that substantial amounts of plastic will still enter our oceans. The production, sale and distribution of many of single-use items are likely to be phased out under the Global Plastics Treaty, as nations move to restrict avoidable plastic products.

While global measures are hugely important in the fight against plastic, the choices of consumers also play a significant role. Reducing, re-using and recycling plastic are powerful ways to cut your plastic footprint. At both ends of the spectrum, the choices made at international and household level can be good news for marine wildlife.


Imagine weekly climate newsletter

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 30,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.The Conversation


Samantha Garrard, Senior Marine Ecosystem Services Researcher, Plymouth Marine Laboratory

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue ReadingFive hotspots where floating plastic litter poses the greatest risk to North Atlantic marine life – new study

Just Stop Oil supporters block the Royal Courts of Justice during injunction trial

Spread the love

Two Just Stop Oil supporters have blocked the entrance to the Royal Courts of Justice. They took action to highlight the injustice of private injunctions being used to silence peaceful dissent in the UK, and are demanding the government end all new oil, gas and coal projects.

At around 10:10 am yesterday, Tez Burns, 35, and Callum Goode, 24, glued themselves to the entrance gates of the Royal Courts of Justice. The action comes after eighteen Just Stop Oil supporters have appeared at the Royal Courts of Justice over the past three days, facing trial over an alleged breach of a civil injunction taken out by National Highways Ltd in 2022.

On Tuesday, eleven Just Stop Oil supporters signed an undertaking committing them to no further action. In addition, six Just Stop Oil supporters, who were previously named on an injunction taken out against Insulate Britain supporters, were not offered an undertaking. Five of these have accepted the breach and will be sentenced today. Both Callum and Tez have refused to accept the breach and have pushed for the case to be heard at trial, which is currently ongoing. 

A Just Stop Oil spokesperson said:

“Injunctions are private laws bought by corporations and government agencies. Typically they are used to protect someone from harassment, and are intended as a remedy not a punishment, but since the Insulate Britain campaign began, they’ve been increasingly used by the State and private companies to silence dissent by climate resistors. They are being used to circumnavigate the usual rule of law, where defendants appear before a high court judge with no jury. They potentially expose defendants to ‘double jeopardy’ for the same action, where they may also be facing criminal charges. Typically injunctions result in astronomical legal costs which are applied to people named on an injunction, even if they have never broken it. Where defendants are offered an undertaking- which commits them to a certain action- and they choose to sign it, all costs are then divided equally amongst any remaining defendants. This is a divide and rule tactic being used to silence those speaking out about the criminality of politicians and business leaders.”

Callum Goode 24, a maths graduate from Ashbourne, said:

“I’m being taken to court for allegedly breaking a court order I wasn’t even aware of, granted just two days before I climbed a gantry over the M25 to demand an end to new oil and gas licences. Hidden away, a judge with no jury will be deciding what happens to me. I’ve already spent 11 weeks in prison without trial for the action I took that day and I will also face a criminal charge- this double jeopardy is obvious injustice. 

For this stand I’m likely to face tens of thousands of pounds in costs and potentially prison and I’m only one of hundreds facing the injustice of these injunctions. In court, I have told the truth as I have sworn to – that resisting a government that is knowingly taking actions that are killing countless people and risking hundreds of millions more lives, is the only moral option.”

The use of injunctions to silence climate defenders has received international condemnation. Michel Forst, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention recently said“I am deeply troubled at the use of civil injunctions to ban protest in certain areas, including on public roadways.” adding: “The repression that environmental activists who use peaceful civil disobedience are currently facing in Europe is a major threat to democracy and human rights.”

“The environmental emergency that we are collectively facing, and that scientists have been documenting for decades, cannot be addressed if those raising the alarm and demanding action are criminalised for it. The only legitimate response to peaceful environmental activism and civil disobedience at this point is that the authorities, the media, and the public realise how essential it is for us all to listen to what environmental defenders have to say.”

Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.
Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.
Continue ReadingJust Stop Oil supporters block the Royal Courts of Justice during injunction trial

When the Big Oil CEO Blames You for the Climate Crisis His Industry Created

Spread the love

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/exxonmobil-ceo-blames-public-for-climate Despite being published on Common Dreams it’s not under a CC licence so it’s only an excerpt.

Exxon CEO Darren Woods speaks at an international energy conference on March 7, 2023. (Photo: Mark Felix/AFP via Getty Images)

We simply “waited too long,” said ExxonMobil’s top executive last week. But never mind, the important thing is that we made “above-average returns.”

[L]ast week the CEO of Exxon gave an interview that amounts to an attempt to pawn off the climate crisis on everyone else, and also to map out the road he sees ahead—a road that involves wasting huge amounts of money subsidizing the fossil fuel industry. Darren Woods was talking to Fortune magazine reporter Michal Lev-Ram and editor Alan Murray, who began by explaining that Exxon was a group of charming “Texas tough boys” before teeing up one of the classic softball questions of all time. Some people, he said, were thinking that perhaps Exxon wasn’t entirely “serious about addressing climate change. Tell me why they’re wrong.”

Well, Woods explains, Exxon is a molecule company, by which he means it’s interested in transforming molecules—’and they happen to be hydrogen and carbon molecules’—to ‘address the needs of our society.’ What he’s saying, quite explicitly, is that Exxon is not an electron company, i.e. a company interested in building out wind or solar power. And when Fortune asks him why not, he lets slip the basic truth of our moment: “we don’t see the ability to generate above-average returns for our shareholders.”

For everyone who’s ever asked themselves, why isn’t Exxon (and Chevron and the rest) leading the charge to renewable energy, there’s the answer: you can make money doing it, but not as much as they’ve made traditionally. That’s because the sun and the wind deliver the energy for free, and all you need is some equipment to turn it into electrons. But Exxon controls the molecules—that’s what oil and gas reserves are. And that control means they can make outsize profits—as long as they can persuade the world to keep burning stuff.

And it’s the story of that persuasion where Woods’ words go from galling to really really gross. Because he explains to his nodding interlocutors that the world “waited too long” to start developing renewables. Or, in his particular brand of corporate speak: “we’ve waited too long to open the aperture on the solution sets terms of what we need as a society.”

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/exxonmobil-ceo-blames-public-for-climate

Continue ReadingWhen the Big Oil CEO Blames You for the Climate Crisis His Industry Created

Ice-free summers in Arctic possible within next decade, scientists say

Spread the love

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/05/ice-free-summers-in-arctic-possible-within-next-decade-scientists-say

The first ice-free day in the Arctic could occur more than 10 years earlier than previous projections, the study finds. Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

Home of polar bears, seals and walruses could be mostly water for months as early as 2035 due to fossil fuel emissions

The Arctic could have summer days with practically no sea ice within the next decade due to emissions from burning fossil fuels, a study has found.

This would transform the unique habitat, home to polar bears, seals and walruses, from a “white Arctic” to a “blue Arctic” during the summer months, scientists said. The calculation used for “ice free” means less than 1m sq km, in which case the Arctic would be mostly water.

The findings, published in the journal Nature Reviews Earth ­­& Environment, suggest the first ice-free day in the Arctic could occur more than 10 years earlier than previous projections.

The authors said consistently ice-free Septembers could be expected by 2035 to 2067. The exact year within that period is dependent on how quickly the world reduces the amount of fossil fuels burned.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/05/ice-free-summers-in-arctic-possible-within-next-decade-scientists-say

Continue ReadingIce-free summers in Arctic possible within next decade, scientists say

NOAA Warns World’s Coral on Verge of ‘Worst Bleaching Event in History of the Planet’

Spread the love

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

A view of major bleaching on the coral reefs of the Society Islands on May 9, 2019 in Moorea, French Polynesia. (Photo: Alexis Rosenfeld/Getty Images).

“It’s looking like the entirety of the Southern Hemisphere is probably going to bleach this year,” one scientist said.

Driven by sustained climate-fueled oceanic heating, the planet is on the brink of another mass coral bleaching event that marine biologists warn could kill large swaths of tropical reefs including significant areas of Australia’s Great Barrier Reef.

Scientists are sounding the alarm following months of record ocean temperatures exacerbated by the planetary emergency and the El Niño climate pattern in the Pacific Ocean.

“It’s looking like the entirety of the Southern Hemisphere is probably going to bleach this year,” Derek Manzello of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Coral Reef Watch told Reuters. “We are literally sitting on the cusp of the worst bleaching event in the history of the planet.”

As NOAA explains:

When water is too warm, corals will expel the algae (zooxanthellae) living in their tissues causing the coral to turn completely white. This is called coral bleaching. When a coral bleaches, it is not dead. Corals can survive a bleaching event, but they are under more stress and are subject to mortality.

In 2005, the U.S. lost half of its coral reefs in the Caribbean in one year due to a massive bleaching event. The warm waters centered around the northern Antilles near the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico expanded southward. Comparison of satellite data from the previous 20 years confirmed that thermal stress from the 2005 event was greater than the previous 20 years combined.

Following the planet’s hottest summer on record last year, the Caribbean suffered its worst recorded bleaching event. The last worldwide bleaching occurred in 2014-17, when scientists say approximately 15% of all reefs experienced major coral deaths. Nearly a third of the Great Barrier Reef’s coral perished during the bleaching.

In the Southern Hemisphere, where summer is ending and ocean temperatures are at or near their annual peaks, there is “basically bleaching all over the place,” according to Manzello.

Matthew England, a professor at the University of New South Wales in Australia who studies ocean currents, recently told TheNew York Times that “the sea ice around the Antarctic is just not growing” and “the temperature’s just going off the charts.”

“It’s like an omen of the future,” he added.

It’s a similar story in the North Atlantic, which “has been record-breakingly warm for almost a year now,” University of Miami hurricane expert Brian McNoldy told the Times. “It’s just astonishing. Like, it doesn’t seem real.”

A 2018 report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that global heating of 1.5°C is likely to result in the loss of 70-90% the planet’s coral reefs over the coming decades.

Current emissions-based forecasts have Earth on track for at least 1.5°C of warming, which researchers say is likely to trigger five climate tipping points: melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, mass die-off of warm-water coral reefs, thawing of Arctic permafrost, and collapse of the North Atlantic Subpolar Gyre circulation.

The European Environment Agency’s long-term forecasts for 2071-2100 predict worldwide oceanic heating of 0.5°C-3.8°C, depending on future greenhouse gas emission scenarios.

Scientists say the best way to avert worst-case outcomes for both coral reefs and the climate is to swiftly transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Reducing land-based pollution and overfishing are also critical to reef preservation.

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue ReadingNOAA Warns World’s Coral on Verge of ‘Worst Bleaching Event in History of the Planet’