Plastic Pandemic: The ultimate solution to an environmental disaster that might last generations
There is a stark fact about plastic pollution: pandemic has aggravated it.
After raising awareness of the Coronavirus’ environmental impact, the present article will focus on some solutions to protect public health without costing the Earth.
The plastic pollution crisis
The amount of plastic produced worldwide increased 250 times between 1950 and 2015. Ironically, the major advantage of this material, i.e. durability, coincides with its predominant flaw. Believe it or not, plastic waste dating back to 1960 was recently found in the ocean.
How did it get there?
If not recycled or reused, plastic can enter the ocean through different pathways.
On top of that, the current recycling system doesn’t seem to work.
Based on this study, as of 2015, only ca. 9% of all plastic waste generated worldwide was recycled, while the great majority was landfilled or brutally dumped into the environment.
But that’s not the end of it.
Over time, plastic gradually breaks down into small particles, i.e. microplastics, which have now become a staple food for ocean wildlife and apparently for us too.
A 2019 research found microplastics are toxic for human immune cells. Also, they work as a carrier for toxic chemicals which can then enter our body.
The environmental impact of disposable face masks
The Coronavirus-loaded wind swelled the plastic wave over the last year. Although lockdown had an ephemeral beneficial effect on air quality, the anti-virus disposable face masks have driven the uptick in plastic pollution in the ocean.
The first telltale signs of COVID waste have already been spotted in the Mediterranean sea, where face coverings floated like jellyfish. Masks were also sighted on Soko’s islands’ shore near Hong Kong and along a Japanese beach in Fujisawa.
While Coronavirus will disappear from our lives in the (hopefully) near future, single-use protective gears are here to stay for long. Disposable face coverings such as surgical and N95 masks contain polypropylene (PP), which has a lifespan of up to 450 years.
As the virus spread across the globe, masks proliferation followed right away.
Last February, Chinese single-use face coverings production surged 5 times compared to the pre-pandemic era. But the over 100 million masks manufactured each day in China were not enough to meet the global demand. In fact, in March, alarmed by a personal protective equipment (PPE) shortage worldwide, the World Health Organization (WHO) invited industries and governments to increase mask manufacture by 40%.
According to some estimates, 129 billion disposable masks per month are being used by the global population during the pandemic.
Based on a United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)’s study, around 75% of Coronavirus plastic will likely clog landfills and pour into the oceans.
Animals are grappling with plastic invading their habitat. Snipping the straps before disposing of single-use face masks would avoid entangling wildlife. Though it may not be enough to preserve biodiversity as proved by the Magellanic penguin’s death after ingesting an N95 mask.
How to reduce Coronavirus plastic waste
What can be done to counter this concerning trend?
The reduction is the keyword to solve the plastic pollution riddle.
Let’s dive in some plastic reduction strategies to curb the lasting impact posed by COVID waste on the environment.
- Plastic reduction policies
Considering the global sales of disposable face masks is predicted to grow over the next seven years, more stringent trade rules can help limit the juggernaut plastic economy.
The Breaking the Plastic Wave report forecasted global plastic pollution could be curbed by 80% within 2040 through a series of interventions on the plastic value chain, such as using biodegradable or more easily recyclable materials.
Similar conclusions were drawn in this paper, which suggests the development of a more eco-friendly and affordable mask design using bio-based materials as well as improving waste management (recycling) and incentivising reusable PPE. On top of that, researchers advocate for more support to nonprofit organizations to ensure more accurate monitoring of Coronavirus waste leakage across the globe.
2) Eco-friendly masks production
There have already been some initiatives in replacing plastic with more sustainable materials for the fabrication of masks.
Alice Pott invented a recipe for a green face mask. The designer picked flowers from parks and blended them with food waste collected from the local markets, butchers and households in London to craft some bioplastic face shields. Each organic ingredient serves a purpose for her artistic creation: seasonal flowers and vegetables were turned into dyes, the sugar in the fruits was used for flexibility, and protein gave structural strength.
A French company, Geochanvre, used hemp to develop Europe’s first compostable face mask. Their production process entailed flattening stacks of locally grown hemp fibres into sheets, which are then used as raw material for the biodegradable face masks. Between March and September, the firm sold 1.5 million of hemp-derived masks.
Baltex, a textile manufacturer, adopted a different approach. The company converted recycled plastic bottles into a washable face mask. Baltex claimed the final fabric to be high-performance, with good breathability and extremely comfortable. Unlike mentioned earlier, this appears to be an effective recycling scheme.
3) Reusable masks
Reusing masks can help significantly cut down COVID waste.
As estimated by UCL Plastic Waste Innovation Hub, if everyone in the UK were to wear reusable masks rather than single-use PPE, a 95% waste reduction could be achieved.
Except for healthcare workers and people at high-risk, WHO has encouraged the public to use homemade reusable cloth masks instead of disposable ones. On the other hand, this type of protective gear may not guarantee adequate protection against the virus, and further studies are needed to ascertain its effectiveness.
Although N95 masks are certified for one-time use, the University of Nebraska Medical Center has been using UV to disinfect the masks and use them for a week or longer. However, this is an experimental approach which was dictated by a mask shortage for hospital health workers and is not considered ideal.
In alternative to the above-mentioned options, a more efficient reusable mask has just been put on the market by Air Device: The Air Device Light. This smart mask is provided with the highest level (H14) high particulate air (HEPA) filter commercially available, thus achieving the most efficient air purification.
The Air Device Light’s structure is plastic-free, except for the HEPA filter, which however contains far less plastic than disposable surgical and N95 masks. Also, unlike single-use PPE, the filter will last several days depending upon air quality. If used in heavily polluted cities like Ghaziabad or in dusty environments (i.e. places near deserts), the filter will have to be replaced as often as once a week. On the other hand, in areas with cleaner air (e.g. Sydney), the mask will be perfectly functional for up to one month with no filter replacement.
Therefore, the Air Device Light represents an optimal solution for tackling plastic pollution, as it would minimize Coronavirus waste generation without sacrificing the level of protection required.
Lighting the greenway towards a healthy future
Our society must find a balance between public health and environmental safety, which are clearly intertwined.
As people can’t forgo wearing masks, governments have to pursue policies promoting low-cost sustainable alternatives to plastic-made protective gears.
Instead of producing new masks, a circular economy model should be adopted. This would dictate a design optimization allowing to prolong the face covering’s lifetime.
Among the solutions discussed above, the Air Device Light seems to be the most promising tool for a safe transition to circularity, thus closing the loop on plastic.
