Impacts of COVID-19 1st Place - Rae Sarssam

“Plastic pollution: A pandemic within a pandemic” by Rae Sarssam

Overview:

Since December of 2019, the world has been drastically affected by a global pandemic known as COVID-19. Its highly contagious nature, along with its severity in symptoms, causing millions of deaths, has caused governments to implement unprecedented measures to prevent the spread, including local and national lockdowns, curfews and mandating personal protective equipment (PPE).

Plastics are an ideal product because of their physicochemical properties, which becomes an easy solution in a global pandemic where action needs to be forceful and immediate. Just one example of increased production and consumption is China, who increased production by 450%, from 20-110 million in February 2020 [1]. The key areas of the pandemic that have affected plastic pollution are: the increased medical waste; the requirement of PPE; increased requirement of disinfection of public spaces, encouragement of single use ‘disposable’ masks, and carbon footprint impact of decreased fuel consumption.

Increased medical waste:

Even in a world unencumbered by a pandemic, there is a large propensity for hospitals and medical centers to use one time, disposable equipment. It’s a logical endeavour considering cross contamination and general hygiene, but single use plastics (SUP’s) account for 42% of all plastic pollution, and in an environment where the stress on health services is ever increasing, it becomes a power struggle between consumption and safe disposal. Constant high pressure environments and a general strain on staffing and equipment has caused a necessity of petroleum derived polymers such as polypropylene, and left the importance of proper disposal ill-considered [2]. Inappropriate disposal often leads to an unnecessary addition to marine pollution and landfill, both movements we endeavour to disperse due to their long term detriment to the environment [3].

Requirement of PPE:

Personal protective equipment has been a key article throughout the pandemic, initially by healthcare and frontline workers, but more recently, as mandated by many governing bodies, by members of the general public. Encouragement of ‘medical grade’ disposable masks is apt from the position of safety; it’s a one time wear and instant removal of possible infection, however insufficient education and lack of guidance about proper disposal has seen an imminent threat to environmental sustainability. As with any other marine litter, PPE is expected to interact with the environment, as will almost certainly result in another source of secondary microplastics, particularly as many surgical face masks consist of interwoven nanofibres that inevitably will release under degradation conditions [4].

Increased requirement of disinfection:

Many of the disinfectants recommended to sterilise against COVID-19 contain quaternary ammonium and sodium hypochlorite (bleach). Other mixtures include hydrogen peroxide, isopropanol and others. Several studies have shown that there is a direct link between regular

use of disinfectants and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases in healthcare workers [5]. If these damaging materials are not properly disposed of, they pose a serious threat to human and aquatic life. Leaching of chemicals can have a hugely detrimental effect on marine organisms, damaging food supplies like coral and causing long term respiratory damage. Given that microplastics are known carriers of chemicals such as environmental pollutants and additives, it’s more than possible it could even affect early stages of foetal morphology, as recent studies suggest that the abundance of microplastics has become so integrated into marine environments that it has integrated to the food chain, to the point of identification in the placenta of unborn foetuses [6].

Changes in restrictions and fuel consumption:

Some governing bodies, including the steps of New York, Delaware, Maine, Oregon and Hawaii, have delayed long sought after SUP (single use plastic) restrictions amid the COVID-19 pandemic, some even going as far as to ban alternative options. From an even more fundamental level, the price of petroleum has fallen drastically over the course of 2020, resulting in an increased favourability to the manufacturing of virgin plastics, due to an unmatched fall in water, land and air traffic and transport. Due to the persistence and infectiousness of the Sars-CoV-2 strand, many governments have been forced to undertake inappropriate methods of PPE disposal, resulting in an increased environmental footprint, as the energy lost from the incineration of plastics encourage GHGs (greenhouse gases) and hazardous compounds to the environment [1].

Executive Summary:

The main plastic pollution effect from COVID-19 seems to stem from the increased use of medical waste and the mandated requirement of PPE for the public as well as healthcare workers. Improper disposal caused by lack of education is not only causing a drastic increase of plastic pollution in aquatic environments, but is also contributing significantly to global warming and having a substantial environmental impact. This could be reduced by education on means of disposal, e.g. cord cutting, but also using reusable fabric masks as an example of a simple change that could reduce plastic output significantly.

Bibliography:

[1] Silva, A.L.P., Prata, J.C., Walker, T.R., Campos, D., Duarte, A.C., Soares, A.M., Barcelò, D. and Rocha-Santos, T., 2020. Rethinking and optimising plastic waste management under COVID-19 pandemic: Policy solutions based on redesign and reduction of single-use plastics and personal protective equipment. Science of the Total Environment, 742, p.140565. (Accessed 28.12.2020)

[2] Gorrasi, G., Sorrentino, A. and Lichtfouse, E., 2020. Back to plastic pollution in COVID times. (Accessed 15.01.2021)

[3] Silva, A.L.P., Prata, J.C., Walker, T.R., Duarte, A.C., Ouyang, W., Barcelò, D. and Rocha-Santos, T., 2020. Increased plastic pollution due to COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and recommendations. Chemical Engineering Journal, p.126683. (Accessed 2.12.2020)

[4] De-la-Torre, G.E. and Aragaw, T.A., 2020. What we need to know about PPE associated with the COVID-19 pandemic in the marine environment. Marine pollution bulletin, 163, p.111879. (Accessed: 15.01.2021)

[5] Ji, X. and Long, X., 2016. A review of the ecological and socioeconomic effects of biofuel and energy policy recommendations. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 61, pp.41-52. (Accessed 2.12.2020)

[6] Ragusa, A., Svelato, A., Santacroce, C., Catalano, P., Notarstefano, V., Carnevali, O., Papa, F., Rongioletti, M.C.A., Baiocco, F., Draghi, S. and D'Amore, E., Plasticenta: First evidence of microplastics in human placenta. Environment International, 146, p.106274. (Accessed 2.1.2021)