1. Microplastics: What’s the BIG Deal?
This original presentation was created in April, 2015 for the Florida Marine Science Educators’ Association annual conference. It was also given at the National Marine Educators Association conference in June It was given in a 45-minute time slot (but without going into detail about the research; more information is included in the Notes sections of the slides for those who may want to tweak it for a college-level presentation).
This version of the presentation was updated Sept 6, Please check for the most current version online at
Maia McGuire, PhD
Extension Agent

2. What are microplastics?
Oxford Dictionary definition of plastic: A synthetic material made from a wide range of organic polymers such as polyethylene, PVC, nylon, etc., that can be molded into shape while soft and then set into a rigid or slightly elastic form.
Microplastics are generally defined as plastics that are less than 5 mm in size
Since about the 1950’s, plastic has become ubiquitous. There are many different types of plastics and these days it is difficult to find a non-food product that does NOT contain plastic. In 2004, the term “microplastic” was coined by Dr. R.C. Thompson. In 2008, the first International Research Workshop on the Occurrence, Effects and Fate of Microplastic Marine Debris defined microplastics to include all plastics that are less than 5 mm in size. While a minimum size for microplastics has not been defined, in many studies, a 330 micron net/screen size is used to capture the plastics. Recent research (Barrows et al., 2017) shows that these methods might miss up to 99.9% of the microplastics in the water.
Thompson, R. C., Olsen, Y., Mitchell, R. P., Davis, A., Rowland, S. J., John, A. W. G., McGonigle, D. & Russell, A. E Lost at sea: Where is all the plastic? Science 304,
Barrows, A.P.W., C.A. Neumann, M.L. Berger and S.D. Shaw Grab vs. neuston tow net: a microplastic sampling performance comparison and possible advances in the field. Analytical Methods DOI: /C6AY02387H

3. Secondary microplastics
Microplastics are divided into two groups. Secondary microplastics, like those shown here, are small pieces resulting from the degradation of larger plastic items. Dr. Anthony Andrady (editor of the 2003 book, Plastics and the Environment) is often quoted as saying, “Every piece of plastic ever made still exists today,” although probably in smaller and smaller pieces. Plastics can photodegrade (as a result of UV light), chemically degrade, or undergo microbial degradation.
Secondary microplastics
Pieces from degradation of larger plastic items

4. Secondary microplastics
Fibers
Polyester, nylon, acrylic, polypropylene
“Microfiber”
Shed from fabrics during washing and drying
One of the biggest sources of microplastics is fabrics. When we wash synthetic fabrics, or use them for cleaning or drying, microscopic fibers can be shed. Common synthetic (plastic-based) fabrics include polyester, nylon, acrylic and polypropylene. The term “microfiber” is often used for combinations of these synthetic fibers.
Different studies have tried to quantify the number of fibers released when washing fleece jackets—e.g. see Estimates range from 1,900 to as many as one million fibers potentially being released in a single wash (results depend on whether or not soap is included, the age of the fleece jacket and the type of jacket). (Published as Hartline et al Microfiber Masses Recovered from Conventional Machine Washing of New or Aged Garments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50: )
Release of fibers from microfiber fleece blankets during drying was 3.5 times greater than the amount of fibers released during washing (Pirc, U., M. Vidmar, A. Mozer, and A. Krzan Emission of microplastic fibers from microfiber fleece during domestic washing. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23: )
Browne, M.A., P. Crump, S.J. Niven, E. Teuten, A. Tonkin, T. Galloway, R. Thompson Accumulation of Microplastic on Shorelines Worldwide: Sources and Sinks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45:
Åström, L Shedding of synthetic microfibers from textiles. Examination course in Environmental science, University of Gothenburg. Accessed at

5. Primary microplastics
Primary microplastics are those that are deliberately made as small pieces. “Nurdles” are the common form of pre-consumer plastic. In other words, this is the form in which plastic is shipped to manufacturers who then melt it down in order to make their production items. They are often shipped by the containerload. As you can see, they come in different colors. They are not totally spherical.
Primary microplastics
“Nurdles”

6. Primary microplastics
Other primary microplastics are made for inclusion in personal care products like many facial scrubs. Often referred to as “microbeads,” these plastics (often polyethylene) come in various colors and sizes. In addition to plastic microbeads, the facial scrubs also often contain microcrystalline wax, which is a petroleum-based product.
Primary microplastics
“Microbeads”

7. Where do microbeads come from?
Added to many personal care products for color/shine, fillers….
Are not removed by wastewater treatment plants
So why are microplastics added to items that we use on or in our bodies? There does not seem to be a good reason. Most seem to be simply for appearance’s sake—they might make the toothpaste sparkle, for example (and surely that should mean that the toothpaste will make our teeth sparkle, right?...) Often they provide color to the product. They may simply be an inexpensive filler.
So how do you tell if a product contains plastics? You need to look at the ingredients list—the most common type of microplastic used in personal care products is polyethylene.
Unfortunately, these plastics are very small and very light, so they float and are not typically completely removed by wastewater treatment plants. (Imagine trying to filter millions of gallons of water per day through a screen that is only 1/8” mesh size—it would constantly be clogging and needing to be cleaned! It’s just not feasible). WWTPs are designed to remove solids by allowing them to settle, but polyethylene does not settle—it does the opposite, either being neutrally or positively buoyant.
While some (even most) microplastics (including fibers) are removed during the treatment process, the sheer volume of microplastics entering the WWTPs means that millions of microplastics are being discharged in WWTP effluent every day.
Murphy, F., C. Ewins, F. Carbonnier, and B. Quinn Wastewater Treatment Works (WwTW) as a Source of Microplastics in the Aquatic Environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50:
Dris, R., J. Gasperi, V. Rocher, M. Saad, N. Renault, and B. Tassin Microplastic contamination in an urban area: a case study in Greater Paris. Environ. Chem. 12:
Magnusson, K., and F. Norén Screening of microplastic particles in and down-stream a wastewater treatment plant. IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute Report # C 55.

8. Just before the end of 2015, President Obama signed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, after quick passage by both the House and Senate. One caution about the bill--it does not completely eliminate plastic microbeads from ALL personal care products--there is language that states that it applies specifically to "rinse-off cosmetics" that are "intended to be used to exfoliate or cleanse the human body or any part thereof." It does explicitly include toothpaste, but deodorants, lotions and makeup products are exceptions under this language. The bill can be read at A news story about a similar piece of legislation being proposed in Britain stated that personal care product manufacturers were unwilling to remove plastic from all of their products, so the rinse-off cosmetics designed to exfoliate or cleanse was a compromise ( It is also important to note that “microbeads” are defined as being solid pieces of plastic less than 5 mm in size. Hollow plastic spheres (like those used for some “bursting beads” in facial scrubs) are not prohibited by the Microbead-Free Waters Act.
The bill bans both the manufacture and sale of products containing microbeads in the US. The manufacture ban took effect on July 1, 2017; the ban on sale of these products became effective starting July 1, Other countries are working on similar legislation.

9. So why do we care about microplastics?
They are in the environment, and seem to be increasing in abundance
They never biodegrade
They are eaten by marine life
There are many reasons to be concerned about microplastics. They are in the environment, and probably always will be. Data from the Algalita Marine Research Institute showed that the amount of plastic (macro- and micro-) sampled in the same ocean gyre had increased more than seven times between 1999 and In 1999, the group reported that plastic outweighed zooplankton by a ratio of 6:1. By 2008, that ratio was 45:1. Many published studies have shown that plastics occur in the gut contents of marine species in the wild--from invertebrates (bivalves) to fishes. Sea turtles and birds are known to consume plastics, but microplastics have not been specifically addressed in these larger animals. Lab studies have shown uptake of microplastics by a variety of animals, from zooplankton and corals to mussels and fishes.
Petroleum-based plastics are made using several different types of chemicals that have the potential to cause harm. Many people have heard of BPA, or have at least seen “BPA-free” tags on plastic water bottles. BPA is a suspected endocrine disruptor which was found to leach out of plastic bottles into the bottles’ contents. Plasticizers like phthalates as well as flame retardants are added to many plastics. These chemicals are also suspected endocrine disruptors and may have other harmful health effects.
Microplastics have been reported from just about everywhere that people have looked for them. Because plastics have different densities, microplastics are distributed throughout the water column, and not just at the surface. As they become fouled, floating plastics will eventually sink. Microplastics have even been found in deep sea sediments. Many studies have investigated gut contents of aquatic animals (both wild and aquacultured) and have found plastics (particularly fibers) in most species studied. As we have mentioned, microplastics were even found in salt that was dried and sold for human use in China. A challenge in trying to quantify the amount of microplastic in the ocean (or freshwater, for that matter) is the small size and temporal/spatial variability. The most accurate way to measure microplastics is by filtering a dipped sample (or water being pumped from the source), but this method can only sample 1-2 liters at a time before the filter clogs. Manta trawls (or neuston nets) are typically used to sample large volumes of water, but the mesh size on these ( microns) allows a large amount of the smallest plastics (fibers) to pass through without being collected.
e.g. Ivar do Sul, J.A., M.F. Costa The present and future of microplastic pollution in the marine environment. Environmental Pollution 185:
Woodall, L.C., A. Sanchez-Vidal, M. Canals. G.L.J. Paterson, R. Coppock, V. Sleight, A. Calafat, A.D. Rogers, B. E. Narayanaswamy, and R.C. Thompson The deep sea is a major sink for microplastic debris. Royal Society open science 1:
Good review in:
U.S. EPA A Summary of Literature on the Chemical Toxicity of Plastics Pollution to Aquatic Life and Aquatic-Dependent Wildlife. Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology. EPA-822-R

10. Which plastics float and which sink in seawater?
Whether as nurdles or plastic products, this graphic shows the densities of each of the main plastic types, Although not included in the graphic, PLA and PHA plastics are denser than seawater, so will also sink and accumulate in sediments on the sea floor.

11. Questions…. What impacts do microplastics have on marine organisms?
Can/will microplastics bioaccumulate up the food chain?
Are there potential human health risks from microplastics?
There is much that we do not (yet) know about the impacts of plastics in the environment. As mentioned earlier, hopefully research over the next several years will help answer some of these questions. Several studies (generally looking at individual species of marine organisms) show that filter feeders can remove microplastics from the water. However, what happens next is generally not understood. A recent (2017) study showed that goldfish will excrete 90% of ingested microplastics within about 36 hours. Studies published in 2013 and 2014 showed that it is possible for microplastics to be passed from predator to prey (in a lab setting). Other studies have shown that chemicals that are sorbed to the surface of plastics can leach into tissues of marine worms, fish or mussels that consume the plastics. One of these studies also showed that toxins could leach into worm tissues as a result of exposure to those plastics in the benthos. However, the environmental relevance of these lab studies (which may use unrealistically high concentrations of toxins or plastics) has been questioned (Koelmans et al. 2016).
Probably the biggest unknown is that of human health risks. On 2014, the EPA held a forum on “possible human health risks from microplastics in the marine environment.” A summary of that forum is available online; the ultimate conclusion was, “The current state of the science does not allow an assessment of possible human health risks from the ingestion of seafood contaminated with microplastic-derived persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals.”
Griforakis, S., S.A. Mason, and K.G. Drouillard Determination of the gut retention of plastic microbeads and microfibers in goldfish (Carassius auratus). Chemosphere 169:
Koelmans, A.A., A. Bakir, G.A. Burton, and C.R. Janssen Microplastic as a Vector for Chemicals in the Aquatic Environment: Critical Review and Model-Supported Reinterpretation of Empirical Studies. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50:
US Environmental Protection Agency Summary of Expert Discussion Forum on Possible Human Health Risks from Microplastics in the Marine Environment.
Setälä, O., V. Fleming-Lehtinen, Maiju Lehtiniemi Ingestion and transfer of microplastics in the planktonic food web. Environmental Pollution 185:
Farrell, P., K. Nelson Trophic level transfer of microplastic: Mytelus edulis (L.) to Carcinus maenas (L.). Environmental Pollution 177: 1-3.

12. Plastic-related toxins were found in plankton and baleen whales
In addition, the plastics themselves contain harmful chemicals like phthalates and bisphenyl A, or BPA. These chemicals are added to the plastics to give them their desired properties (e.g. flexibility). A study in the Mediterranean recorded the amount of microplastics in several locations, and also collected plankton at those locations. The researchers tested the plankton for the presence of phthalates, and found measurable levels of two types of phthalates. They also tested the blubber of five fin whales that had stranded in the Mediterranean (which has a resident population of these baleen whales, which feed primarily on copepods). They found measurable amounts of one of the phthalate types in the whale blubber. While the researchers did not try to attribute the presence of the phthalates to the cause of death of the whales, they did interpret it to mean that whales might be exposed to phthalates either through eating exposed plankton or perhaps by consuming microplastics themselves.
Plastic-related toxins were found in plankton and baleen whales
Phthalates measured in plankton and fin whale blubber (5 stranded animals) in the Mediterranean

13. Phthalates in Florida bottlenose dolphins
Urine samples were collected from 17 resident dolphins in Sarasota Bay as part of a routine health assessment
Dolphin age ranged from 2 to 34 years
71% of dolphins had at least one phthalate metabolite in their urine
Closer to home, Dr. Randy Wells at Mote Marine Lab has headed the Sarasota Dolphin Research Program since In 2016 and 2017, the team analyzed urine samples for metabolites of phthalates. Most of the dolphins had these metabolites in their urine, regardless of age or gender.
Hart et al Urinary Phthalate Metabolites in Common Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) From Sarasota Bay, FL, USA.
Open Access.
Phthalates in Florida bottlenose dolphins

14. In addition to the toxins that can be inside the plastics, plastic can be an attachment site for many different types of toxins. PCBs, polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and DDT compounds have been found concentrated on the surface of plastics in the ocean (up to 1 million times more concentrated on the plastic than in the ambient seawater*). When animals consume the plastic, these toxins can dissociate from the plastic and end up in the animals’ tissues.
*Mato, Y., T. Isobe, H. Takada, H. Kanehiro, C. Ohtake, T. Kaminuma Plastic Resin Pellets as a Transport Medium for Toxic Chemicals in the Marine Environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 35:

15. Potential impacts of consuming/ exposure to microplastics
Pacific oysters had decreased egg production and sperm motility. Fewer larvae survived; those that did grew slowly compared to controls.
Plastic leachate impaired development of brown mussel larvae
Shore crabs fed microplastic fibers consumed less food over time
Sussarellu, R., M. Suquet, Y. Thomas, C. Lambert, C. Fabioux, M. E. J. Pernet, N. Le Goïc, V. Quillien, C. Mingant, Y. Epelboin, C. Corporeau, J. Guyomarch, J. Robbens, I. Paul-Pont, P. Soudant, and A. Huvet Oyster reproduction is affected by exposure to polystyrene microplastics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 113 (9):
e Silva, P.P.G., C.R. Nobre, P. Resaffe, C.D.S. Pereira, and F. Gusmão Leachate from microplastics impairs larval development in brown mussels. Water Research 106:
Watts, A.J.R., M.A. Urbina, S. Corr, C. Lewis, and T.S. Galloway Ingestion of Plastic Microfibers by the Crab Carcinus maenas and Its Effect on Food Consumption and Energy Balance. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49:

16. Microplastics have been found in
Tap water
Bottled water
Beer
Sea salt
Oysters
Mussels
Etc….
Two scientific papers hinting at the potential for microplastics to enter the human food chain were published in late A study published in Environmental Science and Technology, and summarized in Scientific American, tested 15 brands of sea salts, lake salts and rock/well salts from supermarkets throughout China. The microplastics content was particles/kg in sea salts, particles/kg in lake salts and particles/kg in rock/well salts. In sea salts, fragments and fibers were the prevalent types of particles compared with pellets and sheets. Microplastics measuring less than 200 μm represented the majority of the particles, accounting for 55% of the total microplastics, and the most common microplastics were polyethylene terephthalate, followed by polyethylene and cellophane in sea salts. A more recent study in Scientific Reports (2017), similarly found microplastics (fragments, filaments and films) in sea salts from various locations. Dr. Sherrie Mason (SUNY Fredonia) reports also finding microplastics in sea salts, beer, tap and bottled water (pers comm. 2017). Much of the plastic found in bottled water was fragments of polypropylene, which is commonly used to make bottle caps.
A study published in the journal Nature presents the results of sampling the gut contents of fish and bivalves available whole at seafood markets in California and Indonesia. Although the sample sizes are fairly small, there were plastics found in several of the species looked at. In Indonesia, anthropogenic debris was found in 28% of individual fish and in 55% of all species. Similarly, in the USA, anthropogenic debris was found in 25% of individual fish and in 67% of all species. Anthropogenic debris was also found in 33% of individual shellfish sampled. The authors suggest that this suggests the need to include plastic waste when developing seafood safety advisories.
Yang, D, H. Shi, L. Li, J. Li, K. Jabeen and P. Kolandhasamy Microplastic pollution in table salts from China. Environ Sci Technol 49 (22):
Rochman, C.M., A. Tahir, S.L. Williams, D.V. Baxa, R. Lam, J.T. Miller, F.-C. Teh, S. Werorlangi and S.J. Teh Anthropogenic debris in seafood: Plastic debris and fibers from textiles in fish and bivalves sold for human consumption. Sci. Rep. 5, 14340; doi: /srep14340.
Karami, A., A. Golieskardi, C.K. Choo, V. Larat, T.S. Galloway. And B. Salamatinia The presence of microplastics in commercial salts from different countries. Sci. Rep. 7, 46173; doi: /srep46173.
Mason, S. A., Welch, V. G., & Neratko, J. (2018). Synthetic Polymer Contamination in Bottled Water. Frontiers in chemistry, 6, 407. doi: /fchem
(non peer-reviewed report from a study of drinking water)

17. Doctors presented the results of a pilot study at a gastroenterology conference in October in this study, they asked eight individuals(from 7 European countries and Japan) to keep food journals and then provide fecal samples for analysis. They reported finding plastic in all eight of the samples.
The Environmental Agency in Austria tested the stool samples for 10 different types of plastic. They found nine of them, most commonly PET and polypropylene (PP), a common component of plastic food wrappers and synthetic clothes.
In terms of quantity, the stool samples contained, on average, 20 particles of plastic, ranging in size from 50 to 500 micrometers. (For comparison, a human hair is about 100 micrometers thick.)

18. People often want to know how much plastic gets into the ocean every year. In a paper published in Science in February, 2015, researchers estimated how much plastic waste enters the ocean, using data from 192 countries. Their total estimate was between 4.8 and 12.7 million metric tons per year. To visualize this, they equate the amount to 5 grocery bags of plastic for every foot of coastline in those 192 countries (including the US). The researchers predict that the annual input will double to about 17 million metric tons by The total amount of plastic that has entered the ocean at that point is expected to be about 80 million metric tons.
Jambeck, J.R., R. Geyer, C. Wilcox, T.R. Siegler, M. Perryman, A. Andrady, R. Narayan, and K. L. Law Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347 (6223):
8 million metric tons equates to 5 grocery bags of plastic per foot of shoreline of the 192 countries studied.

19. Many researchers who study plastics in the ocean agree that there is a need to reduce the amount of plastic waste being generated. With the exception of what has been incinerated, all of the plastic ever created probably still exists.

20. What can we do? Reduce, reuse, recycle, refuse
Check labels on personal care products
Participate in beach cleanups, and look for the very small plastics
An overview article in Science in 2014 stated, “Given the concerns over microplastics, the temptation may be to ‘clean up the mess,’ but substantial removal of microplastic debris from the environment is not feasible. Identification and elimination of some of the major inputs of plastic waste is a more promising route, as is reduced consumption and the recognition of plastic waste as a resource.”
While some removal methods have been proposed, the reality of the situation is that we cannot feasibly remove the plastics from the water without having huge bycatch issues. The sheer mass of plastic thought to be in the ocean makes removal efforts unrealistic. What we can realistically do is all try and reduce our input of plastics into the environment. There are a number of ways to do this (discuss list on slide with audience members).
Unfortunately, recycling is not a great option for plastic. Because the price of petroleum-based plastic is based on the price of oil, when oil prices are low, so is the demand for recycled plastic (it is just as cheap if not cheaper to purchase virgin plastic). Plastic can generally only be recycled one time (unlike glass or metal, which have almost limitless capacity to be recycled, or paper, which can be recycled multiple times). If markets for recycled plastic are low, plastic that is collected for recycling can often end up at the landfill anyway.
NOTE: some people may have heard about Boyan Slat’s proposed ocean cleanup device (TEDx talk at or They should also read the arguments as to why this effort will not work ( More on this in slide 29.
Law, K.L., R.C. Thompson Microplastics in the seas. Science: 345:

21. Reduce Plastic Waste
About 50 million single use plastic water bottles are disposed of in the US every day
Over 242,000 were collected in the 2017 International Coastal Cleanup in the US
Globally, ALL of the 10 top items found in the ICC since 2017 are made from or contain plastic…
The image shows data from the 2018 International Coastal Cleanup. Plastic cups and plates, and Forks, knives and spoons were new to the top ten list in 2018, and they were #10 and #4! Straws and stirrers increased from #7 in the 2017 cleanup to #3. Plastic and foam take out containers (# 8 and 10 in 2017) fell out of the top ten in 2018.
Full 2019 ICC report (2018 data): 

22. Bragging about Flagler County School District
Never underestimate the power of a 2nd grader
Public school cafeterias have, over the years, transitioned from using washable plates, utensils and cups to disposable (plastic) ones. In 2016, second grade students at Old Kings Elementary School (Flagler County) learned about microplastic pollution from Flagler County’s UF/IFAS Extension Sea Grant agent. Concerned about plastic’s impacts on marine life, the students realized that their school cafeteria generated a lot of plastic waste. They started a petition to ask their cafeteria to become plastic-free. This led to the students educating the Flagler County School District’s food services director about their concerns. High school students at Flagler Palm Coast High School, who were also learning about microplastics from the Sea Grant agent, researched alternatives to foam food service trays. They discovered food trays made from recycled paper, and requested that the food services director switch to those. A pilot project tested the recycled paper food trays in the two schools in fall In fall 2017, all public schools in the district converted from Styrofoam food trays to ones made from recycled paper. The food services director shared information about this at a statewide meeting, and a coalition of interested school districts quickly formed. Two other school districts (Nassau and Indian River Counties) have also switched to the recycled paper trays, and 28 others are in the process of trying to convert to these degradable trays. In Flagler County alone, it is estimated that this will prevent 1.3 million Styrofoam (plastic) food trays from entering the landfill.
In the school year, at least eight school districts in the Port Orange-based power buying group were utilizing the recycled paper food trays in some or all of their schools (Flagler, Nassau, Indian River, Marion, Leon, Osceola, Suwannee, and St Johns).

23. Some suggestions for reducing our personal use of single-use plastics include using washable cups for hot and cold beverages—even bringing your own to a restaurant that uses plastic or foam cups.

24. Companies make washable drinking straws out of plastic, glass or metal
Companies make washable drinking straws out of plastic, glass or metal. Paper drinking straws are also available. People can ask their local restaurants to consider only providing straws upon request. Reusable shopping bags (ideally cotton, but even plastic-based ones are better than single-use bags) can greatly reduce plastic waste.

25. The issue of fibers shed from clothing is a tough one
The issue of fibers shed from clothing is a tough one. Ideally, we can reduce the problem by choosing natural fabrics rather than synthetic fabrics, but ultimately advances in both water and air filtration may be necessary.

26. Washing machine filters and other products
Re-plumb washing machine drain line into a cartridge water filter or run it through a filter bag into a laundry sink.
Guppy Friend Lint Luv-R Cora Ball
Guppyfriend.com rozaliaproject.org
Currently there are limited options available for dealing with microfibers coming from laundry. The method currently available is to add a filter to the drain hose of the washing machine. This requires either a situation where the washing machine can drain into a laundry sink (in which case a bag-type filter can be used) or plumbing the hose so it attaches to a cartridge filter which then feeds into the drain pipe (which is usually located within a wall). The Filtrol160 and Lint Luv-R are two currently available products. Lint Luv-R apparently removes 87% of fibers from laundry water (from a presentation at 6th International Marine Debris Conference, April 2018). The manufacturer reports that the Filtrol160 removes between 20 and 80% of fibers, depending on the fabric type(s) being washed. Without details on the testing parameters, it is impossible to compare the effectiveness of products at this time.
Two in-machine methods of trapping microfibers are under development—one (“Guppy Friend”) is a bag that you place clothing inside and wash that way. Fibers will apparently become trapped in the seams of the bag. The Cora Ball plans to trap fibers on its exterior and says that fibers will be able to be removed by hand, similar to cleaning a hairbrush. The Rozalia Project, which developed the Cora Ball, states that research by Chelsea Rochman’s lab shows that the Cora Ball removes 26% of fibers from the laundry ( The research tested a single type of fabric (polyester fleece), in a top-loading machine without detergent and in cold water.

27. Florida Microplastic Awareness Project
Funded by a 2015 NOAA Marine
Debris Outreach and Education grant
27 regional coordinators around Florida
Volunteers are collecting 1-liter water samples and filtering them, then observing the filters for microplastics
Tied to larger outreach effort
In Florida, a group of volunteers around the state has spent the past year assessing the abundance of microplastics in local coastal waters. The Florida Microplastic Awareness Project was funded by a 2015 NOAA Marine Debris Outreach and Education grant.

28. Sampling protocol (check out our YouTube channel!)
Volunteers choose their sampling site
On a calm day (preferably), they collect their sample.
The volunteers have been collecting one liter of surface water at a convenient estuarine or coastal location. They bring their sample in to one of 16 locations around the state. There is a series of videos on the Florida Microplastic Awareness Project YouTube channel that explains the protocols in detail.

29. Samples are filtered through 0.45 micron gridded 47-mm filters.
The samples can sit (and preferably should sit for at least a few days) before being filtered.
Samples are filtered through 0.45 micron gridded 47-mm filters.
The volunteers vacuum filter the sample onto gridded 0.45 micron filters.

30. Filters are placed in petri dishes for observation through a dissecting microscope (30-40 X).
They then observe the filters using a dissecting microscopes. The grid lines on the filter are used to ensure that the entire filter is scanned and that nothing is double-counted. The volunteers record the number of pieces of plastic that they see. Until late summer 2017, they were using a sewing needle that had been heated in a candle flame to differentiate plastic fibers from natural ones (this protocol followed that used by others and is published). However, it turns out that cotton fibers react to the hot needle in the same way as plastic fibers. In August 2017, we switched to using a method of heating fibers over a candle flame (natural fibers singe, while plastic fibers melt and form a “blob”).

31. What have we learned? Microplastics are found in Florida waters
Mostly as fibers
Fragments
Very few microbeads
Film
The citizen scientists’ efforts show that there are a lot of tiny plastics in Florida’s waters, and that the majority of the items seen are fibers. In addition to fibers, we have seen fragments in our samples, as well as a very small number of microbeads and small amounts of film.

32. The data…
In the last two years, many volunteers have been testing fibers that they find in their samples by heating them over a flame. Synthetic fibers, like nylon, polyester, or acrylic, melt, while natural fibers become singed but do not change shape. This new analytical method gives us higher confidence that we are identifying plastics correctly. Data collected using these new methods are showing that the majority of one-liter samples contain between one and five pieces of plastic, with the average being 4.2 pieces. Almost 80% of the plastics reported are fibers.
More than 85% of samples analyzed contained at least one piece of plastic. Interestingly, most of the fibers found in samples are natural—these are not included in the numbers reported.

33. FMAP website www.plasticaware.org The Pledge bit.ly/plasticpledge
The citizen science project has been paired with an awareness project to encourage people to change their behaviors to reduce the amount of plastic waste that they generate. The project’s website is plasticaware.org, and on the site there is a pledge that we ask people to take. The pledge contains 8 simple actions—people can indicate if they are willing to make a change or if they already do that behavior (or they can leave it blank). The behavior changes include saying “no straw please,” bringing reusable containers to use as take-out containers at restaurants, bringing washable cold or hot beverage containers instead of using single-use plastic water bottles or foam cups, checking labels on personal care products and avoiding those containing polyethylene plastic, and choosing natural fabrics rather than synthetic (e.g. microfiber) when possible.
bit.ly/plasticpledge

34. Recycling hint: “If in doubt, throw it out”
This flyer summarizes the eight actions suggested in the Microplastic Awareness Project’s pledge. It can be downloaded from
A caveat about recycling—if the wrong items are put in the recycling bin, they can contaminate entire loads of potentially recyclable materials. Small items will fall through the conveyer belts. Bags will tangle the equipment. Bags and other films (wraps for paper towels/toilet paper, zipper seal bags, bread bags, many produce bags, newspaper bags, shipping air pillows, bubble wrap, etc.) can all be recycled, but must be placed in a film/bag recycling collection bin at a store. A hint for determining whether or not film can be recycled—if you can stretch it, you can recycle it (in the proper location). Also look for the newer recycling labels from how2recycle.info on many packages—they give useful explanations about what can be recycled and how. The example here is from a cereal box.

35. “The Pledge” so far… Sept 2015 through June 2019
2,637 pledges (average 3.9 behavior changes pledged)
Over 1,000 valid addresses provided for follow-up
318 follow-up surveys completed
Average of 3.6 behavior changes reported
Our data so far show that people say that they are willing to take actions to reduce their plastic waste, and when we follow up with them, people are reporting having made several behavior changes. On average, people are reporting already doing 4 of the 8 suggested behaviors in the initial surveys. Link to pledge:

36. Find us on Facebook
Facebook group and FB page (Florida Microplastic Awareness Project)
If you would like to follow the project and just learn more about microplastics, in addition to the website, we have a Facebook page and group.

37. Questions?
Maia McGuire UF/IFAS Extension Flagler County 150 Sawgrass Road Bunnell, FL