NOAA's Response and Restoration Blog

An inside look at the science of cleaning up and fixing the mess of marine pollution


1 Comment

Tips for Preventing Small-Vessel Oil Spills

Oily sheen on water in a marsh.

Oily sheen in a marsh. (NOAA)

Though each one is small in volume, oil spills from small vessels add up. In Washington State, when you multiply this volume by the thousands of fishing and recreational boats on the water, they compose the largest source of oil pollution in Puget Sound. How do small oil spills happen? The two most common causes are spillage during refueling and bilge discharge, when oil accumulates along with water in the bottommost compartment of a boat and then gets pumped out..

I sat down with Aaron Barnett, Washington Sea Grant’s Boating Specialist and the coordinator of Washington’s Small Oil Spills Prevention Program, to find out what boaters can do to prevent small spills. He offered this handy checklist of measures for keeping your vessel in ship-shape and stopping spills before they become a problem.

Small Spills Prevention Checklist

Vessel maintenance

  • Tighten bolts on your engine to prevent oil leaks. Bolts can shake loose with engine use.
  • Replace cracked or worn hydraulic lines and fittings before they fail. Lines can wear out from sun and heat exposure or abrasion.
  • Outfit your engine with an oil tray or drip pan. You don’t need anything fancy or expensive; a cookie sheet or paint tray will do the trick.
  • Create your own bilge sock out of oil absorbent pads to prevent oily water discharge. Here’s a helpful how-to guide from Cap’n Mike (Coast Guard Auxiliary Instructor Mike Brough).

At the pump

  • Avoid overflows while refueling by knowing the capacity of your tank and leaving some room for fuel expansion.
  • Shut off your bilge pump while refueling – don’t forget to turn it back on when done.
  • Use an absorbent pad or a fuel collar to catch drips. Always keep a stash handy.

If spills do happen, it’s important that boaters manage them effectively. Spills should immediately be contained and cleaned up with absorbent pads or boomed to prevent their spread. Notify the Coast Guard and your state spill response office, per federal law, and let the marina or fuel dock staff know about the incident, so they can assist.

Man with spill prevention kit.

Seattle recreational boater Greg Mueller placing an absorbent oil spill prevention kit pillow in the engine bilge. (Lauren Drakopulos, Washington Sea Grant)

Lauren Drakopulos is a Science Communications Fellow with Washington Sea Grant and is pursuing her Ph.D. in geography at the University of Washington. Lauren has worked for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and her current research looks at community engagement in fisheries science. Washington Sea Grant, based at the University of Washington, provides statewide marine research, outreach and education services. The National Sea Grant College Program is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) U.S. Department of Commerce. Visit www.wsg.washington.edu for more information or join the conversation @WASeaGrant on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

This story was written by Lauren Drakopulos of Washington Sea Grant.


3 Comments

What You Can Do to Keep Plastic out of the Ocean

This week, we’re exploring the problem of plastics in our ocean and the solutions that are making a difference. To learn more about #OceanPlastics this week, keep your eye on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, NOAA’s Marine Debris Blog, and, of course, here.

A Starbucks coffee cup on a sandy beach by a seabird and people picking up trash.

Keeping a reusable mug in your bag or car can help you remember to opt out of much of the single-use plastic waste that inundates our lives. This coffee cup ended up on a beach in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, thousands of miles from the nearest city. (NOAA)

“Plastic doesn’t go away.” This point was really driven home for me after watching the video, “Open Your Eyes,” which is narrated by Jeff Bridges and produced by the Plastic Pollution Coalition. It serves to remind us how much single-use, disposable plastic we can go through in an average day—and the impacts of all that plastic on the natural world.

The majority of marine debris found around the world is made of plastic. The world’s more industrialized nations, including the United States, create a huge amount of plastic, and unfortunately too much of it ends up in earth’s waters and along its coastlines. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) predicts [PDF] that in the future, as more countries become industrialized, the amount of plastic waste in the ocean will increase as well.

Reflecting on the pervasiveness of single-use disposable plastics, which are manufactured to be used once and thrown away, has forced me to look at my own behavior and ask myself, What types of plastic do I personally use in my daily life? How could we all use less plastic? And what could we do to keep the plastic we do use out of the ocean?

Here are a few areas to get started:

  1. Snacks. I tend to dash out of the house with grapes or apple slices in a plastic bag to eat while driving to work or the gym. A logical alternative would be to eat at home and skip the bag (eating in the car is a bad habit anyway!) or pack snacks in a reusable container.
  2. Coffee. On my way to work, I stop for a latte, complete with plastic lid so it won’t spill while I’m drinking it in the car. It would be better to drink it at the coffee shop in their ceramic mugs—it doesn’t take that long and doesn’t require a plastic lid. Better yet is to bring your own to-go mug.
  3. Grocery shopping. When I buy fresh fruits and vegetables, I could skip the provided plastic bags, or opt for paper or reusable mesh produce bags. Other things to consider at the supermarket: Buying foods like yogurt, cereal, and oatmeal in bulk, rather than single-serving packages; choosing a product packaged in cardboard or glass rather than plastic, such as cleaning products, ice cream, milk, condiments, and soda; and bringing your own grocery bags or boxes to get everything home.
  4. Eating out and on the go. At lunch I frequently buy salads to go in those plastic “clamshell” containers; better to bring food from home in a non-disposable container or buy something that doesn’t come encased in plastic. A lot of restaurants automatically include a straw in your iced tea or soda, so asking the wait staff to skip the straw when ordering makes sense (or bring your own glass or metal straw). Opt to drink water and other refreshing beverages out of a reusable glass or bottle, but if necessary, reuse and then recycle any plastic bottles and cups you do use. When taking food home or to-go, bring your own resusable containers and utensils, and skip the plastic forks, spoons, and to-go containers.
  5. Dry cleaning. Let your dry cleaners know you’d prefer to pick up your clean clothes without the plastic coverings.
  6. Cosmetics. Cosmetics and personal care manufacturers are phasing out polyethylene microbeads from cosmetics, cleansers, and toothpastes, which have been banned in the United States, but until the phase-out is complete, check labels and avoid products with “polyethylene” in the ingredients. Because of their tiny size, microplastics which are usually added to products as an abrasive (like exfoliants) pass through water treatment systems and end up in the ocean and Great Lakes.
  7. Trash cans. Open and overflowing trash cans (or recycling bins) don’t do much to keep trash off the street and out of our waterways. Use waste containers with a lid, and never toss trash on top of an overflowing trash can. Take it with you instead and recycle what you can.
  8. Beaches. When you visit the beach, pack out all your trash and pick up any trash you do see there (and report it with our Marine Debris Tracker smartphone app). Better yet, join beach cleanups to help remove trash from our waterways and coasts (which helps keep bigger plastics from breaking down into microplastics).
  9. Science. Join citizen scientists around the country and adopt a shoreline to help monitor how much and what kinds of plastic and other marine debris wash up each month. You can check out an existing project near you, such as the Florida Microplastic Awareness Project and the projects in National Marine Sanctuaries up and down the West Coast. Or start your own dedicated effort using these tools and resources and report your data to our national database.
  10. Community. We can all talk to our friends, family, students, or coworkers about the issue of plastics in the ocean and share this list of actions they can take too.

These steps are just a start, but they’re all things we can do with minimum impact to our daily lives. Even incorporating one of these actions into your life can make a difference in the amount of plastic pollution in our ocean.

As the lead federal agency for addressing this problem, the NOAA Marine Debris Program funds research on the harmful effects of debris, such as plastics, to the marine environment and efforts to clean up our nation’s coastal waters. They have lots of education and outreach materials with more information about the many ways we, as individuals, can help remedy this growing problem of plastics in our ocean.


Leave a comment

How Do You Begin to Clean up a Century of Pollution on New Jersey’s Passaic River?

A mechanical dredge pulls contaminated sediment from the bottom of the Passaic River.

A mechanical dredge removes sediment from an area with high dioxin concentrations on the Passaic River, adjacent to the former Diamond Alkali facility in Newark, New Jersey. (NOAA)

Dozens of companies share responsibility for the industrial pollution on New Jersey’s Passaic River, and several Superfund sites dot the lower portion of the river. But one of the perhaps best-known of these companies (and Superfund sites) is Diamond Alkali.

In the mid-20th century, Diamond Alkali (later Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Company) and others manufactured pesticides and herbicides, including those constituting “Agent Orange,” along the Passaic. The toxic waste from these activities left an undeniable mark on the river, which winds about 80 miles through northern New Jersey until it meets the Hackensack River and forms Newark Bay.

Fortunately, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with support from the natural resource trustees, including NOAA, U.S. Department of Interior, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, and the New York State Department of Environmental Protection, has released a plan to clean up the lower eight miles of the Passaic River, which passes through Newark.

Those lower eight miles are where 90 percent of the river’s contaminated sediments are located [PDF] and addressing contamination in this section of the river is an important first step.

A History of War

Ruins of an old railroad bridge end part way over the Passaic River.

Ruins of an old Central Railroad of New Jersey bridge along the Passaic River hint at a bustling era of industrialization gone by. (Credit: Joseph, Creative Commons)

A major contributor to that contamination came from what is known as Agent Orange, a mix of “tactical herbicides,” which the U.S. military sprayed from 1962 to 1971 during the Vietnam War. These herbicides removed tropical foliage hiding enemy soldiers.

However, an unwanted byproduct of manufacturing Agent Orange was the extremely toxic dioxin known as TCDD. Dioxins are commonly released into the environment from burning waste, diesel exhaust, chemical manufacturing, and other processes. The EPA classifies TCDD as a human carcinogen (cause of cancer).

Pollution on the Passaic River stretches back more than two centuries, but its 20th century industrial history has left traces of dioxins, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), heavy metals, and volatile organic compounds in sediments of the Passaic River and surrounding the Diamond Alkali site. Testing in the early 1980s confirmed this contamination, and the area was added to the National Priorities List, becoming a Superfund site in 1984.

Many of these contaminants persist for a long time in the environment, meaning concentrations of them have declined very little in the last 20 years. As a result of this pollution, no one should eat fish or crab caught from the Lower Passaic River, a 17 mile stretch of river leading to Newark Bay.

Finding a Solution

But how do you clean up such a complex and toxic history? The federal and state trustees for the Lower Passaic River provided technical support as EPA grappled with this question, debating two possible cleanup options, or “remedies,” for the river. The cleanup option EPA ultimately settled on involves dredging 3.5 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments from the river bottom and removing those sediments from the site. Then, a two-foot-deep “cap” made of sand and stone will be placed over contaminated sediments remaining at the bottom of the river.

This will be an enormous effort—one cubic yard is roughly the size of a standard dishwasher. According to NOAA Regional Resource Coordinator Reyhan Mehran, it will be one of the largest dredging projects in Superfund history. While the entire project could take more than ten years, Judith Enck, EPA Regional Administrator for New York, has pointed out that the process involves “cleaning up over a century of toxic pollution.”

A Tale of Two Remedies

Aerial view of New York City skyline, Newark, and industrial river landscape.

Manhattan skyline from over Newark, New Jersey. The view is across the confluence of the Passaic and Hackensack Rivers and shows the industrial buildup in the area. (Credit: Doc Searls, Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license)

Mehran describes the alternatives analysis as a complicated one—choosing between two cleanup remedies, the one described above and an “in-water” disposal solution. This second approach called for removing the contaminated sediments from the riverbed and burying them in Newark Bay, in what is known as a “confined aquatic disposal cell.” That essentially involves digging a big hole in the bottom of the bay, removing the clean sediments for use elsewhere, filling it with the contaminated sediments, and capping it to keep everything in place.

While the less expensive of the two options, serious concerns were raised about the potential effect this in-water solution would have on the long-term ecosystem health of Newark Bay.

The chosen remedy, which calls for removing the contaminated sediment from the riverbed and transporting it away by rail to a remote site on land, was selected as the better solution for the long-term health of the ecosystem. Finding the best option incorporated the scientific support and analysis of NOAA and the trustees.

As NOAA’s Mehran explains, “The site, with some of the highest concentrations of dioxins in sediment, is in the middle of one of the most densely populated parts of our nation, which makes the threat to public resources tremendous.”

While the upper and middle segments of the Passaic River flow through forests and natural marshes, areas bordering the lower river are densely populated and industrial. Because of industrialization, habitat for wildlife within Newark Bay has already been severely altered, yet the bay’s shallow waters continue to provide critically needed habitat for fish such as winter flounder, migratory birds including herons and egrets, and numerous other species.

“The watershed of the Lower Passaic River and Newark Bay is highly developed,” emphasizes Mehran, “and the resulting scarcity of ecological habitat makes it all the more valuable and important to protect and restore.”

Learn more about the cleanup plan for the Lower Passaic River [PDF].

Photo of Jersey Central Ruins used courtesy of Joseph, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic license.

Photo of Manhattan skyline with Passaic and Hackensack Rivers used courtesy of Doc Searls, Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.


Leave a comment

Restoration on the Way for New Jersey’s Raritan River, Long Polluted by Industrial Waste

The Raritan River as it runs through a wooded area.

A draft restoration plan and environmental assessment is now available for the American Cyanamid Superfund Site which affected the Raritan River in northern New Jersey. (U.S. Coast Guard)

Following years of intensive cleanup and assessment at the American Cyanamid Superfund Site, NOAA and our partners are now accepting public comment on a draft restoration plan and environmental assessment [PDF] for this northern New Jersey site.

For many years, the 575 acre site located along the Raritan River in Bridgewater Township was used by the American Cyanamid Company for chemical manufacturing and coal tar distillation.

However, chemical wastes released during manufacturing at the facility harmed natural resources in the sediments and surface waters of the Raritan River and its tributaries. The facility was designated a Superfund site in 1983 due to contamination by a variety of toxic substances including mercury, chromium, arsenic, lead, and PCBs.

The area affected by the contamination provides habitat for a variety of migratory fish, such as alewife, blueback herring, striped bass, rainbow smelt, American shad, American eel, and other aquatic life. In addition, large numbers of birds nest, forage, and migrate along the Raritan River, from raptors and songbirds to waterfowl and shorebirds.

Over the years, NOAA has worked with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to ensure a thorough cleanup to protect natural resources in the Raritan River watershed. NOAA and our co-trustees, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, evaluated the extent of injury in the river and determined the best path toward restoration.

An Industrial History

Factories and trains at the American Cyanamid chemical manufacturing site, 1940.

The American Cyanamid Company, shown here circa 1940, produced fertilizers, cyanide, and other chemical products whose wastes were released directly into the Raritan River for decades. (Photographer unknown)

The American Cyanamid Company got its start in the early 1900s by developing an effective fertilizer ingredient, a compound of nitrogen, lime, and carbide called cyanamid. By the early 1920s, the company, whose focus had been primarily agricultural products, began producing cyanide for use in gold and silver extraction and hydrocyanic acid, important to rubber production.

Over the next several decades, the American Cyanamid Company diversified, adding chemicals, plastics, dyes, and resins to their growing line of products. Further expanding into pharmaceuticals, the company provided valuable medical products to the World War II effort.

Starting in the 1920s and continuing up to the 1980s, chemical waste associated with the company’s manufacturing practices became an issue. For decades, chemical waste was released directly into the Raritan River.

Waste treatment began in 1940, which meant it was buried at the site or stored in unlined “impoundments,” or reservoirs. That practice stopped in 1979 and dye manufacturing ended three years later. By 1985 there was no more direct discharge into the Raritan River and manufacturing at the site ceased in 1999. It is estimated that over time, 800,000 tons of chemical wastes were buried at the site.

A New Chapter for the Raritan River

The American Cyanamid site on the Raritan River in New Jersey.

The draft restoration plan for the Raritan River aims to restore passage for migratory fish while improving water quality and habitat due to years of industrial pollution at the American Cyanamid manufacturing site. (NOAA)

The restoration plan and environmental assessment were created by NOAA in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. The plan proposes restoration actions that will compensate for any injuries to the river and related natural resources.

A major component of the restoration would be the removal of the Weston Mill Dam, near the confluence of the Millstone and Raritan Rivers. The original dam, a barrier to migratory fish, is thought to have been built around 1700 to power a mill. Removal of the current dam, a 1930s-era concrete replacement of the original, will help to achieve the restoration goals of restoring passage for migratory fish while improving water quality and habitat.

As explained in the plan, removing this dam will return the flow of the Raritan River and the streams it feeds closer to their natural states and do so without negative impacts to endangered species or cultural, sociological, or archaeological resources.

Long situated in an area of industrial activity, the American Cyanamid Superfund Site is only one of several contaminated sites along the Raritan River and its tributaries. Many of these sites are now being remediated, and the watershed is being restored.

According to NOAA Regional Resource Coordinator, Reyhan Mehran, “While it’s likely that this site is among those that contributed to the general degradation of the Raritan River over the last century, the site’s cleanup and compensatory projects will be important parts of the story of restoring the Raritan.”

Learn how to comment on the draft restoration plan and environmental assessment.


Leave a comment

Spiny Lobsters, Tropical Cyclones, and Derelict Traps

Metal trap resting on seafloor with vegetation growing around it.

Derelict lobster trap frame with  bio-fouling (most of the side slats are missing). The trap is residing on mixed seagrass and hard-bottom habitat. (NOAA)

Derelict traps generated by the Florida Keys commercial spiny lobster fishery can result in damage to the benthic habitat (meaning located on the ocean floor) such as seagrass beds and corals. During the passage of a tropical cyclone, strong currents and turbulence are generated underwater which  can move spiny lobster traps,  creating the potential for lost traps and habitat damage. An earlier study addressed the prevalence of non-retrieved traps, estimating that over 85,000 ghost traps reside on the seafloor in the Florida Keys. It has been estimated that ghost traps in the region kill approximately 637,622 lobsters annually.

Seagrass from above with a patch in the middle where the seagrass has worn away.

2005 image of an impact area from a lobster trap that was experimentally deployed in seagrass (Syringodium filiforme, or manatee grass) and remained resting on the seagrass for six months. (NOAA)

A new study focused on the Florida Keys commercial spiny lobster (Panulirus argus)  fishery shows how climate change could compound the negative effect marine debris has on the environment. This is perhaps the first study of its kind as it shows how many spiny lobster traps might be lost given different scenarios of future fishing activity and tropical cyclone intensity. In early April, a journal article on the study, titled “Tropical cyclones, derelict traps, and the future of the Florida Keys commercial spiny lobster fishery” was published in Marine Policy (69: 84-91).

The author, Amy V. Uhrin of NOAA’s Marine Debris Program, looked at climate change, specifically how projected patterns of increasing hurricane intensity could make this a bigger problem as trap loss increases at higher wind speeds as does the movement of traps along the seafloor, causing more benthic habitat damage.


“The legacy of trap debris in the Florida Keys combined with possible increased inputs of yet more trap debris resulting from a future rise in tropical cyclone intensity presents an immediate challenge for both fisheries management and climate adaptation planning and underscores the importance of an effective process for addressing these issues.” — Amy V. Uhrin


The commercial spiny lobster fishery is important to the Florida Keys. According to experts at the Florida Sea Grant Program at the University of Florida, the fishery contributes over 20 million dollars per year to the economy of south Florida and the Florida Keys. Also, 90 percent of Florida’s spiny lobster harvest comes from the Florida Keys. A fact sheet the National Sea Grant program published several years ago recognized the problem of the derelict traps:

Man dropping a wooden trap into the water from the side of a boat.

Traps being deployed. (NOAA)

“Another significant issue in the spiny lobster fishery is the impact of ghost traps. The prevalence of trap gear that has not been retrieved is concerning as it has been noted to have impacts on benthic habitats and contribute to ghost fishing. Traps, though typically weighted with cement, are still capable of drifting large distances with currents along sand or seagrass causing habitat damage through abrasion or entanglement. Once the line and buoy are separated from the trap, lines may drift with the currents and entangle marine organisms or, more likely, entangle reef structures.”

Ms. Uhrin’s study evaluated three scenarios of tropical cyclone intensification across four levels of fishing effort (based on number of traps used). The study takes the position that derelict traps and marine debris generated by their degradation will increase as hurricanes intensify  in the Florida Keys. In order to create the scenarios, Ms. Uhrin carefully looked at historical data of both fishery effort and patterns in the region and calculated future projections, or predictions, of monthly trap loss as related to maximum wind speed under the three levels of tropical cyclone intensification.

The article suggests that “by maintaining existing fishing effort in the coming decades, trap loss could exceed 11 million over 60 years depending upon the rate of tropical cyclone intensification.” Even a scenario of existing fishing effort with a relatively unchanged (Business-as-Usual scenario) hurricane intensification, would generate over 6.5 million lost traps on the seafloor over 60 years, and create the potential for more than 3 million square meters of injured habitat. This is not including the potential for additional injuries during high wind events when the debris is likely to be moving across the seafloor. The author concludes, “The legacy of trap debris in the Florida Keys combined with possible increased inputs of yet more trap debris resulting from a future rise in tropical cyclone intensity presents an immediate challenge for both fisheries management and climate adaptation planning and underscores the importance of an effective process for addressing these issues.”

Woman with glasses.Amy V. Uhrin is currently Chief Scientist for the NOAA Marine Debris Program, where she oversees the research portfolio, leads internal research projects, and oversees Program-funded external research projects. Her work has addressed issues of natural and human-influenced disturbances in seagrass and other coastal ecosystems, including effects of hurricanes, wave energy, vessel groundings, and commercial fishing gear.

 


1 Comment

What Do We Know Today About Microbeads and Microplastics in the Ocean?

Plastic microbeads visible in toothpaste on a toothbrush.

Microbeads are tiny pieces of polyethylene plastic added to health and beauty products, such as some cleansers and toothpastes. They can pass through wastewater treatment processes and end up in the ocean and Great Lakes, posing a potential threat to aquatic life. (NOAA)

Almost four years ago, I was surprised to find out about the presence of plastic microbeads in cosmetic products, such as exfoliating face cleansers and some types of toothpaste.

The problem with these tiny pieces of polyethylene plastic is that once they are washed down the drain, they escape being filtered by wastewater treatment processes, allowing them to enter the ocean and Great Lakes where they could absorb toxic chemicals in the environment and be ingested by animal life.

Microbeads are actually not a recent problem; according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), plastic microbeads first appeared in personal care products about fifty years ago, with plastics increasingly replacing natural ingredients with the same purpose in these products. But even in 2012, this issue was still relatively unknown, with an abundance of products containing plastic microbeads on the market and not a lot of awareness on the part of consumers.

Microbeads, Macro-attention

For several years, the NOAA Marine Debris Program has been working with researchers that are investigating issues relating to microbeads in our marine environment. In recent years, the issue has received a fair amount of attention in the media and elsewhere.

As a result of increasing overall awareness of the problem, many companies that use microbeads in their products have been phasing them out voluntarily. On December 28, 2015, President Obama signed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015 [PDF], banning plastic microbeads in cosmetics and personal care products.

The law was met with a lot of support, including from the Personal Care Products Council, an industry group who commented during the act’s approval process, which said:

“Solid, plastic microbeads are used in personal care cleansing products because of their safe and effective exfoliating properties. Research by independent scientists and nongovernmental organizations show that microbeads from all types of industrial uses are miniscule contributors to marine plastic debris; cosmetic microbeads are a tiny fraction of that. At the same time, our member companies take very seriously their role as environmental stewards of their products. As a result, companies have voluntarily committed to replace solid plastic microbeads. We look forward to this important bipartisan legislation making its way to President Obama’s desk and being signed into law.”

Under the Microscope

Tiny bits of microplastics litter a sandy patch of beach.

Microplastics, which include microbeads, are less than 5 millimeters long (roughly the size of a sesame seed). Most microplastic in the ocean actually ends up there after breaking down from bigger pieces of plastic on beaches. (NOAA)

After I originally learned about microbeads in cosmetic products, I discussed the issue with Dr. Joel Baker, Port of Tacoma Chair in Environmental Science at the University of Washington Tacoma and the Science Director of the Center for Urban Waters.

At the time, he was leading a project for the NOAA Marine Debris Program focused on detecting microplastics in the marine environment. Microplastics, which include microbeads, are minute pieces of plastic less than 5 millimeters long, or about the size of a sesame seed. More recently, he has conducted a study, “Quantification of Marine Microplastics in the Surface Waters of the Gulf of Alaska,” that examined the quantity and distribution of microplastics at specific locations in Alaskan waters over time.

Following the signing of the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, I checked back in with Dr. Baker to get his thoughts on the issue now. Four years ago, he had told me, “While we don’t yet understand the impacts of microplastics to aquatic organisms, we do know that releasing persistent materials into the ocean will result in ever-increasing concentrations of marine debris.”

Speaking to him now, while Dr. Baker sees the attention given to microbeads in health and beauty products over the last few years as a good way to raise awareness about plastics in the ocean, he cautions that there still is not enough known about the damage that these extremely small particles cause. He further points out that while certainly not insignificant, they represent a very small percentage of total microplastic debris in the ocean.

We need more research to be able to measure accurately the presence of smaller microplastics, including microbeads, in the ocean. While Dr. Baker and his colleagues have developed a manual on laboratory methods for extracting microplastics from water samples, the methods do not yet detect the smallest particles such as the microbeads that exist in some health and beauty products.

Breaking Down the Issues

In addition, Dr. Baker pointed out to me that microbeads are not the largest source of marine plastic or even microplastics. “Most plastic in the ocean is from beach plastics that break down and improper disposal of trash,” he said. Cosmetic microbeads are much smaller, and are considered primary microplastics [PDF], as opposed to secondary microplastics, which are the result of larger pieces of plastic breaking down into smaller pieces.

While Dr. Baker found encouraging the news that we’ll be stopping one of the many ways plastic reaches the ocean, he emphasized there are plenty more that will require a lot of effort. He suggested that more attention needs to be paid to the abundance of plastic bags that end up in the ocean, which he feels represents a larger part of the plastic marine debris problem.

The NOAA Marine Debris Program strives to learn more about the impacts of marine microplastics. In addition to Dr. Baker’s work, the program currently is supporting microplastic research projects that include, but aren’t limited to, measuring microplastics in the marine environment; the presence of microplastics in different geographical regions, such as the coastal mid-Atlantic region and national park beaches; examining juvenile fishes to determine if they are ingesting microplastic; and the effects of microplastics in aquatic food chains.

For more information on these issues, you also can refer to a UNEP 2014 update on plastic debris in the ocean [PDF].


1 Comment

Working to Reverse the Legacy of Lead in New Jersey’s Raritan Bay

Person standing at a fenced-off beach closed to the public.

Some of the beach front at Old Bridge Waterfront Park in New Jersey’s Raritan Bay Slag Superfund site is closed to fishing, swimming, and sunbathing due to lead contamination leaching from metal slag used in the construction of a seawall and to fortify a jetty. (NOAA)

Once lined with reeds, oysters, and resort towns, New Jersey’s Raritan Bay, like many other bodies of water, today is feeling the effects of industrial transformation begun decades ago.

Around 1925, the National Lead Company became the largest lead company in the United States. The company is perhaps best known for their white-lead paints, sold under the Dutch Boy label. One of its many facilities was located in Perth Amboy, a town on the western edge of Raritan Bay, where it operated a lead smelter that generated wastes containing lead and other hazardous substances.

A Toxic Toll

Illustration of a little boy painting used in Dutch Boy paints logo.

This image was adopted by the National Lead Company in 1913 for its Dutch Boy paints. A version of it still is in use today. (New York Public Library Digital Collections/Public domain)

During the late 1960s and early 1970s, slag from National Lead’s lead smelter in Perth Amboy was used as building material to construct a seawall along the southern shoreline of Raritan Bay, several miles to the south of the facility.

Slag is a stony waste by-product of smelting or refining processes containing various metals. Slag, battery casings, and demolition debris were used to fill in some areas of a nearby marsh and littered the marsh and beaches along the bay.

In September 1972, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection received a tip that the slag being placed along Raritan Bay at the Laurence Harbor beachfront contained lead.

Over time, contamination from the slag and other wastes began leaching into the water, soil, and sediments of Raritan Bay, which is home to a variety of aquatic life, including flounder, clams, and horseshoe crabs, but evidence of the pollution only became available decades later.

Cleaner Futures

By 2007 the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection had confirmed high levels of lead and other metals in soils of Old Bridge Waterfront Park on Raritan Bay’s south shore. State and local officials put up temporary fencing and warning signs and notified the public about health concerns stemming from the lead in the seawall.

The following year, New Jersey asked the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to consider cleaning up contaminated areas along the seawall because of the elevated levels of metals. By November 2009, the EPA confirmed the contamination and declared this polluted area in and near Old Bridge Waterfront Park a Superfund site (called Raritan Bay Slag Superfund site). They installed signs and fencing at a creek, marsh, and some beaches to restrict access and protect public health.

In May 2013 EPA selected a cleanup strategy, known as a “remedy,” to address risks to the public and environment from the pollution, and in January 2014 they ordered NL Industries, which in 1971 had changed its name from the National Lead Company, to conduct a $79 million cleanup along Raritan Bay.

Cleanup will involve digging up and dredging the slag, battery casings, associated waste, and sediment and soils where lead exceeds 400 parts per million. An EPA news release from January 2014 emphasizes the concern over lead:

“Lead is a toxic metal that is especially dangerous to children because their growing bodies can absorb more of it than adults. Lead in children can result in I.Q. deficiencies, reading and learning disabilities, reduced attention spans, hyperactivity and other behavioral disorders. The order requires the removal of lead-contaminated material and its replacement with clean material in order to reduce the risk to those who use the beach, particularly children.”

Identifying Impacts

Public health hazard sign about lead contamination on a beach and jetty.

A jetty and surrounding coastal area on Raritan Bay is contaminated with lead and other hazardous materials from slag originating at the National Lead Company’s Perth Amboy, New Jersey, facility. (NOAA)

After the Raritan Bay Slag site became a Superfund site in late 2009, NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration worked with the EPA to determine the nature, extent, and effects of the contamination. Under a Natural Resource Damage Assessment, NOAA’s Damage Assessment, Remediation, and Restoration Program and our co-trustees, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, have been assessing and quantifying the likely impacts to the natural resources and the public’s use of those resources that may have occurred due to the contamination along Raritan Bay.

As part of this work, we are identifying opportunities for restoration projects that will compensate for the environmental harm as well as for people’s inability to use the affected natural resources, for example, due to beach closures and restricted access to fishing.

“The south shore of Raritan Bay is an important ecological, recreational, and economic resource for the New York-New Jersey Harbor metropolitan area,” said NOAA Regional Resource Coordinator Lisa Rosman. “Cleanup and restoration are key to improving conditions and allowing public access to this valuable resource.”

Watch for future updates on progress toward restoration on Raritan Bay.