Goodbye for now... and surfing entrepreneurs

Unfortunately, at least for now, it is time to bring my blog to a close. It has been something I have greatly enjoyed doing and I hope readers have learnt something new along the way, as I know I certainly have. I decided that I would like to end my blog by once again returning to the surfing entrepreneurs. In particular, Peter Ceglinski, the managing director of The Seabin Project. Whilst writing this blog I got in touch with him and was lucky enough to get a response. The question I decided to ask him was: "From your experience of being out at sea cleaning up ocean waste, how big do you think the problem is, and do you think we, as humans, are currently going in the right direction to reduce this problem or is far more action needed?" The answer I received was as follows…

“My personal belief is that we are in the exact position that we need to be in right now for a cleaner future. The problem we all have created is huge! The size of the problem is directly related with our limited understanding of plastics, our throw away culture and excessive consumer habits. Human nature seems to always go from one extreme to another as we learn from our mistakes, and right now I feel we are in a transitional period and are moving into the problem solving moment.

We all can do a lot to help also. From positive action like picking up litter from the streets, consuming less and reusing products again. There is a lot of groups doing ‘passive action’ by way of studying the problem, this helps us all learn in many ways, however we need positive action also, real hands on stuff... physically doing something.”

I was grateful for his response and I feel it touched upon much of what we have explored throughout this blog. It is very true that we have created a huge problem in the form of marine pollution, but it is not a problem too great to solve. Peter perhaps takes a more optimistic stance than others might, saying we are in the exact position we need to be in to enact a cleaner future, believing we are entering the ‘problem solving movement’. It remains the case that there is much to be done, but I do hope Peter is right in his assumptions, and I believe this blog has shown his opinion to be true at least to some degree.

For anyone following this blog, I thank you for your interest, with one particular question from a reader sticking out in the memory, pulling me up on the fact that it is “the (not our) sea”. I’ve stuck by what I thought was a catchy name for my blog, but it is absolutely correct that it is not ‘our’ sea, but that of the Earth, so we must do our best to take care of it. Hopefully now, in the coming weeks and months, we will start to see more positive updates regarding marine pollution. Goodbye for now and Merry Christmas.

      

The Ocean Cleanup

Last week I explored some potential solutions, particularly concentrating on methods that focus on preventing further pollution of the ocean. Today, as promised, I'll be looking at one example of positive action - taking out of the sea the waste that is already in it. This is in part due to the fact that I have found myself quite often in this blog referring to things as 'a good start', or 'a step in the right direction'. Maybe I have been saying those words a bit too much. My intention is not to take anything away from steps in the right direction, and good starts are always vital, but it is sometimes nice to see some real positive progress taking place, and on a large scale. So this particular post is dedicated to what could perhaps the most promising initiative of this kind - The Ocean Cleanup.

Before exploring the ins and outs of how The Ocean Cleanup works, lets first introduce its founder, Boyan Slat. Now a 22 year old Dutch entrepreneur, Slat dropped out of his Aerospace Engineering degree in 2013 in order to devote all of his time and efforts to the Cleanup program. Since which time he, along with his invention, has received a variety of prestigious accolades. In 2015, he became the youngest ever person to receive the highest environmental honour given out by the UN: Champion of the Earth. In that same year, The Ocean Cleanup was given the Innovation by Design award from Fast Company, and was listed as one of the best 25 inventions by Time Magazine. The short video below shows Slat talking about what brought him to where he is now, describing how the revolutionary idea was first conceived during one of his high school science projects! 

As he alludes to in this short video, the motto by which The Ocean Cleanup lives is "Why move through the ocean, if the ocean can move through you". This unique principle is what perhaps sets this initiative apart from any other solutions out there. The idea of cleaning up the oceans has previously been seen as next to impossible - the amount of time and money it would take for ships to do the job would almost make it counterproductive. However, the idea of the rubbish coming to you, so long as you place your 'bin' in the right position, seems slightly more doable, and this is essentially what The Ocean Cleanup does. Giant V-shaped arrays, stretching up to hundreds of metres long, are placed in the sea at locations where the waste is believed to be concentrating due to ocean currents. The V shape is what allows the waste to then be directed towards a central collection point - from there it can be periodically removed and stored safely on land. Figure 1 below shows how the array aims to catch debris floating in ocean gyres. 

Ocean Cleanup array (Source)

In a method that involves letting the waste come to you, it is therefore imperative that you have a detailed understanding of exactly where these giant ocean currents are taking the waste. Last year, the Ocean Cleanup carried out its 'Mega Expedition' in order to do exactly that. This particular project, the largest ever of its kind, was focused on the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, arguably the most notorious collection of waste on the planet. Marine biologist, Serena Cunsolo, described their observations as "devastating to see" after joining the team for the expedition. The estimated cost of tackling the patch is a proposed €4.53 per kg of waste, €317 million in total, according to a feasibility study by Slat et al. (2014). The study suggests that with the implementation of a 100 km long array in the North Pacific, the garbage patch could be reduced by 42% in as little as 10 years. 

However, it is key to note that these feasibility studies were carried out by the founders of the Ocean Cleanup program themselves, but those looking in from the outside may propose a different view. For example, studies by Sherman and Sebille (2016) suggest concentrating efforts in nearshore areas will be a far more efficient way of cleaning up the ocean, as oppose to placing these arrays hundreds of miles out to sea. They believe that attempting to clear up the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a distraction from the 'real problem' which is the current input of waste into the ocean. Furthermore, despite constant rebuttals from Slat, some scientists have proposed an ecological impact on marine life, as well as suggesting that Slat has underestimated the forces of waves and currents out at sea. Despite scepticism from some, having raised over $2 million so far to help fund the project, the team placed their 100 m long prototype in the North Sea earlier this year. The main goal is to then be able to start the clean up of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch in 2020. 

Whether you believe efforts should be concentrated on the inputs, or you think that this particular initiative is the biggest sign of progress so far, I feel the whole problem is ultimately summed up perfectly by Rochman (2016). Using the analogy of a burst pipe in her basement, she describes how she would turn off the source of the water, but certainly wouldn't leave a puddle sat in her house either. In essence, stopping the waste at source is crucial, but clearing up what waste has already been created sure can't be a bad idea either.

Government officials... or maybe not

As I referred to surfing entrepreneurs in my opening blog post, I also mentioned government officials as a possible source of solutions. It is certainly the case that some policies can be adopted to help mitigate the problem of marine pollution, such as the proposed ban on microbeads in cosmetics. Furthermore, regulations on the use of harmful substances, such as pesticides, can be applied to try and reduce the effect of chemical pollution in coastal areas. And so it is in this way that governments can be an effective way of addressing the issue of marine pollution. However, when it comes to other sources of waste, or the clean up of that which has already made it to sea, it is a seemingly more difficult area. Plastics and other debris are accumulating in 5 ocean gyres around the world, and these span international waters. So, with which country does the responsibility lie to get out there and clean it all up? That's the dilemma. The video below, produced by NASA, shows exactly how this waste is accumulating all over the world - ignore the questionable pronunciation of 'buoy'.

The problem surrounding governance is something pointed out by Visbeck et al. (2014), who note the shortcomings of international law regarding the regulatory structure set out across the ocean. This has led to calls being made for governments to develop and agree on new sustainable development goals concerning the condition of the ocean. However, the lack of such an arrangement thus far is what has spurred independent organisations on to take the lead in exploring possible solutions. Cleaning up the vast expanse of the ocean may be a daunting task, but reducing the current input is certainly manageable, and might well be the most feasible answer. 'Garbage tracking' studies carried out by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology propose one potential starting point. These involve the tracking of waste to see both the journey it takes, and where it eventually accumulates. This particular study is used to gather information about the current management of waste in the US, in a bid to use that information to influence the way people recycle. However, Sigler (2014) notes how this could be an effective technique to use on marine plastics - following their journey to identify the areas most vulnerable to them.

Another tracking-based method involves the use of potentially millions of fieldwork assistants... us! Yes, that could include you. This particular initiative involves anyone and everyone who comes across waste, either at the coast or throughout waterways, checking-in their location when they do so. It is referred to as the Marine Debris Tracker mobile application, and is the product of a combined effort by the NOAA Marine Debris Program and the Southeast Atlantic Marine Debris Initiative. This method facilitates the constant collection of data, including the location, and type, of marine debris that people are finding. This allows for what could be an extremely detailed observation of exactly where the debris seems to be concentrating. Studies showed this method to have accounted for the tracking of over 400,000 items... and that was a year ago. Whilst this does not necessarily involve any official clean up component, establishing the location of the waste is a necessary start.

Marine Debris Tracker app (Source)

In my 'How does it get there' post, I acknowledged how developing countries are responsible for a considerable amount of waste input into the sea. This is due to the fact that many of them are host to rapidly growing economies and populations. This in turn has given rise to an increasing consumption of goods, without the appropriate waste management infrastructure to cope. This is not to lay the blame on these countries, but to simply point out that they pose a problem that needs addressing. The UN has identified education as a key component of helping improve the management of waste in these countries - teaching the public the importance of appropriate garbage disposal. It is proposed that officials can then be put in place to monitor this in the long run. 

Promisingly, studies have suggested that the sustainable management of waste is a very feasible possibility for developing countries. This is based on the concept of Integrated Sustainable Waste Management (ISWM). In many developing nations, people can benefit economically from waste, and these people would be referred to as stakeholders in this case. The municipality in this scenario is responsible for the cleanliness of the city, as well as the citizens inhabiting it. In short, ISWM attempts to unify all stakeholders in both financial and environmental interests, under the guidance of the municipality. The studies proposed that ISWM is a method which has seen the improvement of both the controlled disposal of waste as well as recycling.

Today I have explored some possible means by which we might reduce the input of waste into the sea. As mentioned previously, going out into the ocean to try and tackle the vast volume of debris that has already accumulated there seems a daunting task. The ocean is over 350 million square kilometres in size, not to mention the 5 trillion pieces of trash that are estimated to be floating around in it. However, next up in my blog I will explore what very well could be a way of cleaning up the ocean. Daunting as it may be, there is a whole lot of waste posing a threat to the wildlife and ecosystems already out there, so getting rid of that could well be as important as stopping additional inputs.  

Surfing Entrepreneurs

Now that we've given a considerable amount of attention to some of the impacts of marine pollution, I feel it appropriate to address some of the possible solutions to it. There is a host of potential solutions, each addressing different aspects of ocean waste. However, I wanted to dedicate my first post on solutions to the people who actually inspired me to write my blog on marine pollution in the first place. Some of you may have been wondering (or may have completely forgotten) what I was alluding to in my first post when I mentioned surfing entrepreneurs. They are the founders of The Seabin Project - an ocean cleanup initiative that involves placing specially crafted bins in marinas, which suck up ocean waste around the clock. In short, these surfing entrepreneurs are a couple of guys who prove that you don't need to be a high ranking official in government to implement a plan to help clean up the ocean. A short video is posted below on who these guys are and how their Seabin works.

As the video explains, it does not merely suck up plastic and other solid waste, but can also help get rid of chemicals, such as oil or detergent, in these marinas. Whilst not the biggest piece of equipment,  it is certainly doing it's part - one of their tweets from last month boasted a day's catch totalling 4.5kg of waste in just one Seabin. A Seabin in every marina across the world might therefore help clear up a fair few kilos of waste! Admittedly though, this is a limited solution, for example it does not address the millions of tonnes of marine debris that are floating around in vast ocean gyres. My coming posts will look at the other initiatives that are gathering momentum with regard to tackling the seemingly more daunting problems such as this. However, I thought this was a fitting way to kick off my posts on solutions, as first and foremost the rubbish in the ocean is coming from us, and these guys prove that we need look no further than ourselves to start tackling this problem.

Chemical Waste

At times in this blog I have mentioned how marine pollution has not necessarily received the same attention that other global issues such as atmospheric pollution perhaps have. This is something nicely pointed out by Gelcich et al. (2014) in their paper on public perceptions of marine environments. This is not to say that ocean waste is more of a problem than our carbon emissions, but the focus on deforestation and fossil fuel burning has almost allowed the condition of our seas to slip under the radar a little bit. In fact, it is only relatively recently that marine pollution has become regarded as a problem in its own right that is in need of a solution. On occasion, it has managed to make front page news, but this is seldom the case and tends only to be in the instance of a catastrophic event. However, one good example of when this has been the case is the gulf of mexico oil spill in 2010, at Deepwater Horizon - described by then White House energy adviser, Carol Browner, as "the worst environmental disaster the US has faced".

Almost 100,000 birds died as a result of the Deepwater Horizon
oil spill (Source)

The spill at Deepwater Horizon was a truly devastating marine disaster, and acted as a perfect example of the damage that chemical pollution can do to the ocean. It therefore feels appropriate to have a brief look at a few of the many figures produced by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in their 2015 report of the event. 68,000 square miles of surface water were contaminated by the spill, as well as over 1,000 miles of coastline. As many as 5,000 marine mammal deaths were estimated, with 1,000 of these being sea turtles. Economically, in excess of $11 billion has been paid in damages to businesses and individuals in the Gulf of Mexico who suffered the effects of the spill. However, whilst international disasters such as this make front page news worldwide, and rightly so, the ongoing chemical pollution of the ocean from other sources tends to go more unnoticed, despite the environmental threat they pose.

In my opening blog post I mentioned how increasing concentrations of nitrogen in the ocean can enhance microbial growth, thus leading to higher volumes of the greenhouse gas, nitrogen oxide, being produced. This in turn contributes to the warming of Earth's atmosphere, going to show that ocean pollution does not just effect marine life but can in fact influence climate on a global scale. That particular study pointed to increasing nitrogen emissions across northeastern Asia as being a cause for this, and further studies have suggested that nitrogen emissions in these areas are becoming greater. Two dominant sources of this ever-growing supply of nitrates to the ocean are the burning of fossil fuels, and agricultural fertilisers, with the latter becoming an increasingly large concern in coastal marine ecosystems.

Nitrates have been used in industrial fertilisers worldwide ever since the introduction of the Haber-Bosch process, which involves the manufacture of ammonia via nitrogen fixation. These nitrates end up in marine habitats via eutrophication - the result of surface water runoff from farms, as explained in my 'How does it get there' post. As discussed, this can increase microbial growth, increasing the production of the greenhouse gas nitrogen. However, this is not the only consequence of hiking up the microbial activity. Studies have shown that enhancing this activity can create 'dead zones', as the excessive amounts of organic matter, created by the nitrates, sinks and decomposes - using up oxygen in the process. Hence, dead zones are defined by a lack of dissolved oxygen in the water, and are a hostile environment for marine organisms. Worryingly, it has been suggested that the occurrence of these dead zones could be set to rise. Figure 1 below is a map of the world's dead zones as of 2005, and unsurprisingly they appear to be rather clustered around the countries which use the most fertiliser.

Figure 1: Dead zones and fertilisers (Source)

Unfortunately, there are yet more threats that eutrophication poses to coastal environments, one such threat being the production of Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB's). These are toxic algae created by chemicals from agriculture and industry that are capable of destroying coral reefs. One study in the Gulf of Oman showed how branching coral species were completely lost due to the HAB's, whilst further species experienced 'substantial reductions' in abundance and richness. Other studies have pointed to the impact that they can have on human health. This is most commonly through the consumption of poisoned shellfish, where the the shellfish concerned have been living in habitats affected by HAB's. One example of this is amnesic shellfish poisoning, which can cause intense gastrointestinal distress and even death, whilst survivors may experience severe memory loss. Due to the impacts of poisoned shellfish, the tourist and fishing industries in these areas can suffer.

In our day to day lives it is likely that we will use oil, whether it be through petrol in your car (or the bus if you take it), or perhaps it is used for your heating at home. Similarly, it is perhaps even more likely that the food you eat everyday has been grown on a farm somewhere, using chemical fertilisers. Oil and agricultural chemicals are thus two huge components of everyday life around the world, so as long as we are reliant on them it is important that we understand their impacts on the environment, to allow for mitigation. Now, as promised for the optimists out there, the remainder of this blog will focus more on what is hopefully going to be promising news on marine pollution, by looking at the progress being made to stop it.

Update on Microbeads

Another quick update for today as this morning it was reported that the British government have ordered a review into the impact of microbeads on the food chain. I noted a short while ago in this blog that marine organisms in our food chain are known to ingest microplastics, but the effect of this on human health is relatively unknown due to the lack of study on the matter. This announcement therefore comes as a welcome step towards a better understanding of this particular phenomenon.

It is hoped that further investigation being dedicated to this field will assist with the introduction of rules and regulations regarding the use of microbeads within various products. Earlier this year, the government announced its plans to introduce a ban on microbeads used in cosmetics, to be implemented in 2017. However, it is as of yet undecided exactly what products this ban will encompass, with concerns now being raised over the use of microplastics in household cleaning products. Hopefully therefore, with the government demanding further studies, the true extent to which all microplastics are affecting our food chain will be revealed. Ultimately, this will help to tackle the growing problem of microplastics in the ocean.

Wave goodbye (pun intended) to microbeads - we may soon have to find
something else to invigorate our skin (Source)

The Centre of the Universe... and us

Contrary to popular belief, we humans are not the centre of the universe. In fact, on a planet that is over 4 billion years old, and home to more than 8 million species, to say we are the centre of Earth alone would be a bit of a stretch too. As the timeline in Figure 1 shows, our existence on Earth represents a rather insignificant proportion of its history. However, this does not mean our effect on it will be insignificant. Evidence for the considerable effect that humans are having on the Earth is there for all to see, and as per my blog topic, we will be looking at this influence relative to the oceans. In my 'Waste by the Ocean' post, I spoke about how our waste can come back around to bite us - perhaps a rather egocentric approach. Therefore, I will now look in more detail at how it effects the Earth and everything else on it.



Figure 1: a timeline of Earth's history (Source)

Us humans represent but a small percentage of life on Earth, so it is important to consider how our actions influence what's around us. One way in which our waste can affect marine life involves entanglement in debris. This debris can then lead to death in various ways including drowning, strangulation, and starvation by inhibiting ability to feed. Studies on Australian fur seals at Seal Rock have estimated that in this particular location over 300 seals become entangled in marine debris every year. There are repercussions of this, as other observed seal populations have shown, where almost one third of entangled seals have displayed visible injuries. Furthermore, only 19% of these seals were tangled in collars that were loose enough to be removed. 

Marine mammals are not the only sufferers though, as bird populations can also experience problems related to entanglement. A study in Wales on a Gannet population revealed how the seabirds often use marine debris when making nests. An estimated 18 tonnes of debris has been used for nest building across the colony under investigation. This in turn increases risks associated with entanglement, which can lead to high mortality rates. The effects of this are not thought to have population-level impacts, though this is not believed to be a particularly well understood aspect and warrants further enquiry. This is due to the fact that deaths via entanglement in seabird populations can often be isolated, or even go unnoticed due to the interference of factors such as sinking and predation.

The other major influence on marine life from ocean waste is ingestion, and various studies such as that on fish species by the Spanish Coast have proven this to occur. In this instance, almost 20% of fish under investigation were found to have consumed microplastics. One problem of this consumption relates to possibly harmful chemicals on the plastics. Despite bans on the use of toxic substances such as PCB's (polychlorinated biphenyls) in agriculture, the chemicals themselves still exist in our environment today. These PCB's attach themselves to microplastics; Andrady (2015) proposes this as a likely method by which toxins might be transferred across organisms after ingestion of the plastics. Further evidence suggests that microplastic ingestion is positively correlated with PCB concentration. However, it is important to note that the possible transfer of toxins in this way, and subsequent effect, is a relatively understudied phenomenon. 

There are various ways in which plastics might be mistakenly ingested, one example is exactly that, a mistake, perhaps birds thinking it is their prey. Other ways include microplastics attaching themselves to seaweed, where they are then consumed by herbivores. However, once ingested, the danger of harmful chemicals is not the only threat to wildlife. Taylor et al. (2016) suggest that one danger of ingesting plastics involves the damaging of the stomach lining, which in turn can cause starvation. Other ways in which organisms can starve include blockage of the digestive tract by larger debris. Figure 2 shows the plastic debris found inside a sperm whale, after it died from starvation, thought to be due to gastric blockage. Included in the findings were large items such as flower pots and hose pipes.

Figure 2: plastic debris found inside deceased sperm whale (Source)

If nothing else, one thing this does show is that we live in a world where our mere waste has the ability to impact life. With our rapidly growing technologies and population, we are developing a power over the environment incomparable to that which we have ever previously held. So onto a cheesy quote; "with great power comes great responsibility". I first heard this in Spiderman, but the likes of Winston Churchill have uttered words similar. This is to say that our actions have consequences, which can sometimes be severe. However, as Figure 1 showed, we have only been on Earth for the 'blink of an eye', so to be able to render the planet inhospitable to ourselves, and others, within that time would be much more than just a terrible shame. We are therefore lucky to have the science available now to show us what we do wrong, so that next time we might do it right.

My next post will move away from plastics to look in more detail at the chemical waste going into our oceans, and what effect this is having. Then, following that, I will start looking at the solutions that are in place to address marine pollution. Much of this blog so far has been a bit doom and gloom with regard to the damage we are causing our oceans. However, it is important to acknowledge when positive progress is being made, which it is, and we'll have a look this later down the line.