Beyond Microbeads: Microplastics in Great Lakes Tributaries · • Microplastics present in every...

transcript

Beyond Microbeads: Microplastics in Great Lakes Tributaries

Quantifying and characterizing the contribution of plastics from streams to lakes

Austin Baldwin, Steve Corsi, Pete Lenaker, Michelle Lutz - USGS Wisconsin Water Science Center

Sherri Mason - State University of New York at Fredonia

Manitowoc River, WI

This information is preliminary and is subject to revision. It is

being provided to meet the need for timely best science. The

information is provided on the condition that neither the U.S.

Geological Survey nor the U.S. Government shall be held

liable for any damages resulting from the authorized or

unauthorized use of the information.

Great Lakes microplastics study (Eriksen et al. 2013, Marine Pollution Bulletin)

- Among first

freshwater studies

- Alarming numbers of plastic microbeads in some samples

Sherri Mason

plastic particles less than 5mm in diameter

More than just microbeads!

Microplastics

Sources to the environment Cosmetics and personal care products

Exfoliation

• Soaps, scrubs, toothpastesa-d

• Several hundred thousand per tubee

Film formation, viscosity control

• Deodorants, sunscreen, lipstick,

eye shadow, shaving cream,…d

• 1 - 50 µm in diameter

- Pass through WWTPs, into streamsf

- “Banned” in several states

5gyres.org

newscientist.com

a. Gregory 1996; b. Barnes et al. 2009; c. Fendall and Sewell 2009; d. UNEP 2015; e. 5-Gyres Institute; f. McCormick et al. 2014

Sources to the environment

• Fibers from synthetic

clothing & textiles

– Up to 1,900/ garment/washing a

– Some pass through WWTPs, most capturedb-

patagonia.com

Photo: Sherri Mason

a. Browne et al. 2011; b. Habib et al. 1998; c. Zubris and Richards 2005; d. Gasperi et al. 2015

• Mechanical and photodegradation of litter

For example: bags, bottles, nets, styrofoam, wrappers,

cigarette buttsa,b

a. Browne et al. 2007; b. Cole et al. 2011

• Preproduction pellets and powdersa

• Bead blasting (boat hulls, engine parts)b

• Overland sludge applicationc

• Medical uses (drug delivery)d

• Pheromone flakes – 3-layered PVC laminate, 2/ft2 e

• Atmospheric deposition – 29-280 particles/m2/day f

sermopel.com

charlotteobserver.com

extension.iastate.edu

a. Mato et al. 2001; b. Gregory 1996; c. Zubris and Richards 2005; d. Browne et al. 2007; e. MN Poll. Control Agency 2014; f. Gasperi et al. 2015

Why should we care?

Ingestion • Observed in marine mammals, birds, fish, turtles, and

invertebratesa-e

• Plastics found in 82% of Lake Superior Lake Herring in 2013f

• Mussels in Nova Scotia: 126-178 microplastics/organismj

• Trophic transfer up food chaing,h

• Hazards poorly understood:

obstruction of digestive system, clogging of feeding

appendages, nutritional deprivation, bioaccumulation,

migration into the circulatory system, and deathb,c,e,i

a. Thompson et al. 2004; b. Teuten et al. 2009; c. Tourinho et al. 2010; d. Lavers et al. 2014; e. Derraik 2002; f. M. Vinson, S. Mason, personal comm.; g. Farrell and Nelson, 2013; h. Setala et al. 2014; i. Wright 2013; j. Mathalon and Hill 2014

Vectors for Contaminants

Flame retardants

Alkyl phenols

Antimicrobials (triclosan)

Antioxidants (BPA)

Plasticizers (phthalates)

Styrenes PCBs

Metals

Pathogens

Plastic additives Sorption & accumulation

Barnes et al. 2009; Browne et al. 2007; Mato et al. 2001; Teuten et al. 2009; Lavers et al. 2014; Betts 2008; McCormick et al. 2014

GLRI Study 2014 29 tributaries

~22% of total inflow to the Great Lakes Range of land uses

4 samples/site (2 baseflow, 2 stormflow) urban

agricultural

natural

Basin land use

Sample collection

Sample processing

Analytical Methods Sherri Mason’s lab at SUNY Fredonia

Sieved into three size classes: • 0.355-0.999mm • 1.00-4.749mm • >4.75mm

Floatation in salt water to separate plastic particles

Digestion of organic matter using wet

peroxide oxidation

Photos courtesy of Tim Hoellein

Bead/pellet (personal care products, preproduction pellets)

Fragments

Foam (styrofoam)

Line (nets, rope)

Particles counted & categorized using light microscope

Photo: Sherri Mason

Film (bags, wrappers)

Fibers (clothing, textiles)

Photo: Sherri Mason

plant material

Tangle of fibers

Photo: Sherri Mason

Results

Particle sizes (48 samples)

Size range Count Percent of total

0.355-0.999mm

9,742 79

1.00-4.749mm 2,424 20

>4.75mm 233 1.9

All sizes 12,399 100

Preliminary Information-Subject to Revision. Not for Citation or

Distribution

Concentrations by site and plastic type

71% are fibers/lines

1% pellets/beads

Preliminary Information-

Subject to Revision.

Not for Citation or Distribution

Plastic particle concentrations vs urban land use

Plastic particle concentrations vs WWTP effluent

charlotteobserver.com

Concentrations vs

flow condition (34 baseflow, 14 stormflow)

Estimated daily loads corresponding

to individual samples

0.36 – 1.5 Billion Particles/Day

Great Lakes vs Tributaries

* from Eriksen et al. 2013

1,950 3,540

10,200

466,000

* from Eriksen et al. 2013 *

Pellet/bead

Fragment

Fiber/line

Great Lakes vs Tributaries:

Relative abundance of particle types

(collected with like equipment and

analyzed by the same lab)

Pellet/bead

Fragment

Fiber/line

Polymers and densities (from Driedger et al, ‘15)

0.01 – 0.04 g/cm3 Expanded polystyrene

0.89 – 0.98 Polyethylene 0.85 – 0.92 Polypropylene

1.13 – 1.16 Nylon 1.30 Cellulose acetate 1.38 – 1.41 Polyester

1.38 – 1.41 Polyester 1.38 – 1.41 PVC

Pellet/bead

Fragment

Fiber/line

Polymers and densities (from Driedger et al, ‘15)

0.01 – 0.04 g/cm3 Expanded polystyrene

0.89 – 0.98 Polyethylene 0.85 – 0.92 Polypropylene

1.13 – 1.16 Nylon 1.30 Cellulose acetate 1.38 – 1.41 Polyester

1.38 – 1.41 Polyester 1.38 – 1.41 PVC

Woodall et al. 2014

• Concentrations in sediment 4 orders of magnitude

greater than at ocean surface

• Average of 13 fibers/50ml sediment

Fibers in deep sea sediment

Summary • Microplastics present in every tributary sample to date

(max 11.4 particles/m3, median 1.8 particles/m3)

• Tributary concentrations 10-100 times greater than in Great Lakes

• Relations with flow condition, land use, and wastewater effluent remain unclear

• Fibers dominate in tributaries (71% of all particles)

– May be settling out in lakes

– Sources beyond WWTP effluent?

• Beads/pellets rare (1% of all particles)

Preliminary Information- Subject to Revision. Not for Citation or Distribution

Acknowledgments WI: Paul Reneau, Nic Buer, Ben Siebers, Troy Rutter, Becky Carvin, Ben Torrison, Joe Schuler, Molly Breitmun, Kyle Raimer MI: Joe Duris, Cyndi Rachol, Rick Jodoin, Julia Giesen

IN: Cheryl Silcox, Ed Dobrowolski, Eric Looper, Andy Gorman, Howard Mills OH: Stephanie Kula, Stephanie Janosy, Chad Toussant, Brian Mailot NY: Brett Hayhurst, Ben Fisher MN: Josh Larson, Russ Buesing, Jeff Copa SUNY: Rachel Ricotta, Joylyn Kovachev, Katie Donnelly, Evan Miller

Questions? Austin Baldwin

akbaldwi@usgs.gov

References

1. D. Habib, D. C. Locke, L. J. Cannone, Synthetic fibers as indicators of municipal sewage sludge, sludge products, and sewage treatment plant effluents. Water. Air. Soil Pollut.. 103, 1–8 (1998). 2. K. A. V. Zubris, B. K. Richards, Synthetic fibers as an indicator of land application of sludge. Environ. Pollut.. 138, 201–211 (2005). 3. M. A. Browne et al., Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines woldwide: Sources and sinks. Environ. Sci. Technol.. 45, 9175–9179 (2011). 4. M. R. Gregory, Plastic scrubbers’ in hand cleansers: A further (and minor) source for marine pollution identified. Mar. Pollut. Bull.. 32, 867–871 (1996). 5. D. K. A. Barnes, F. Galgani, R. C. Thompson, M. Barlaz, Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci.. 364, 1985–1998 (2009). 6. L. S. Fendall, M. A. Sewell, Contributing to marine pollution by washing your face: Microplastics in facial cleansers. Mar. Pollut. Bull.. 58, 1225–1228 (2009). 7. M. A. Browne, T. Galloway, R. Thompson, Microplastic--an emerging contaminant of potential concern? Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag.. 3, 559–561 (2007). 8. M. Cole, P. Lindeque, C. Halsband, T. S. Galloway, Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review. Mar. Pollut. Bull.. 62, 2588–2597 (2011). 9. Y. Mato et al., Plastic resin pellets as a transport medium for toxic chemicals in the marine environment. Environ. Sci. Technol.. 35, 318–324 (2001). 10. C. Lohse-Hanson, G. Skuta, K. Katrina, Plastic Microbeads in Minnesota: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (2014). 11. R. C. Thompson et al., Lost at Sea: Where Is All the Plastic? Science. 304, 838 (2004). 12. L. C. Woodall et al., The deep sea is a major sink for microplastic debris. R. Soc. Open Sci.. 1, 140317 (2014). 13. M. Eriksen et al., Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Mar. Pollut. Bull.. 77, 177–182 (2013). 14. C. M. Free et al., High-levels of microplastic pollution in a large, remote, mountain lake. Mar. Pollut. Bull.. 85, 156–163 (2014).

15. L. T. Yonkos, E. A. Friedel, A. C. Perez-Reyes, S. Ghosal, C. D. Arthur, Microplastics in Four Estuarine Rivers in the Chesapeake Bay, USA. Environ. Sci. Technol. (2014) (available at http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es5036317).

16. A. Lechner et al., The Danube so colourful: A potpourri of plastic litter outnumbers fish larvae in Europe’s second largest river. Environ. Pollut.. 188, 177–181 (2014).

17. R. A. Castañeda, S. Avlijas, M. Anouk Simard, A. Ricciardi, Microplastic pollution in st. lawrence river sediments. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.. 71, 1767–1771 (2014).

18. E. L. Teuten et al., Transport and release of chemicals from plastics to the environment and to wildlife. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci.. 364, 2027–2045 (2009).

19. P. S. Tourinho, J. A. Ivar do Sul, G. Fillmann, Is marine debris ingestion still a problem for the coastal marine biota of southern Brazil? Mar. Pollut. Bull.. 60, 396–401 (2010).

20. J. L. Lavers, A. L. Bond, I. Hutton, Plastic ingestion by flesh-footed shearwaters (Puffinus carneipes): Implications for fledgling body condition and the accumulation of plastic-derived chemicals. Environ. Pollut.. 187, 124–129 (2014).

21. J. G. Derraik, The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull.. 44, 842–852 (2002).

22. P. Farrell, K. Nelson, Trophic level transfer of microplastic: Mytilus edulis (L.) to Carcinus maenas (L.). Environ. Pollut.. 177, 1–3 (2013).

23. O. Setälä, V. Fleming-Lehtinen, M. Lehtiniemi, Ingestion and transfer of microplastics in the planktonic food web. Environ. Pollut.. 185, 77–83 (2014).

24. S. L. Wright, R. C. Thompson, T. S. Galloway, The physical impacts of microplastics on marine organisms: a review. Environ. Pollut. Barking Essex 1987. 178, 483–492 (2013).

25. K. Betts, Why small plastic particles may pose a big problem in the oceans. Environ. Sci. Technol.. 42, 8995 (2008).

26. A. McCormick, T. J. Hoellein, S. A. Mason, J. Schluep, J. J. Kelly, Microplastic is an abundant and distinct microbial habitat in an urban river. Environ. Sci. Technol.. 48, 11863–11871 (2014).

27. J. Gasperi, R. Dris, V. Rocher, B. Tassin, Microplastics in the continental area: an emerging challenge. NORMAN Netw. Bull., 18–19 (2015).

28. A. Mathalon, P. Hill, Microplastic fibers in the intertidal ecosystem surrounding Halifax Harbor, Nova Scotia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 81, 69–79 (2014).

References (continued)

Beyond Microbeads: Microplastics in Great Lakes Tributaries · • Microplastics present in every...

Documents