Why Eco-friendly Art?
"Particles of paint account for more than half (58%) of all micro-plastics that end up in the world's oceans and waterways every year, according to a new study." - FORBES, 9 February 2022.
The information herein comes from recent studies and research articles carried out by numerous scientific bodies around the world. A source list is included below.
Acrylic paint, or, if you prefer, synthetic polymer, is basically colour pigment suspended in a liquid plastic made up of plasticisers, silicone oils, de-foamers, and stabilisers, which results in a product that can stick to or dry on any surface. Anything made of acrylic is synthetic; it is not a natural substance but produced in a factory from chemicals that come from planet-warming fuels like crude oil, natural gas, or coal.
Plastic production has increased significantly in recent decades, with an estimated 400 million metric tonnes of plastic produced worldwide each year. The impact of this mass production has been devastating, with the most significant concern being the generation of micro-plastics and nano-plastics.
If you want to learn more about plastic production, you will find many step-by-step guides online to help you understand the process.
When we wash paint brushes in the sink, we send billions of micro and nano scale plastic particles down the drain. Those particles are non-biodegradable and pose a host of dangers to humans, animals, and plant life. The water from your sink becomes domestic wastewater, which flows through the sewerage system to wastewater treatment plants, where it is treated before being discharged into other bodies of water. Wastewater treatment plants act as a collection point for various contaminants, which include micro-plastics and nano-plastics. Unfortunately, at this point in time, treated wastewater does not include successful extraction of all micro and nano-plastics, leading to contamination, as you will discover.
First, what are micro and nano-plastics?
The term micro-plastic refers to a piece of plastic that is smaller than 5mm in length, roughly equivalent to a grain of rice. Meanwhile, nano-plastics are far smaller, at just 100 nanometers or less; their sizes range from the width of a human hair down to the size of a red blood cell.
Flinders University Professor Sophie Leterme has said, “It’s impossible now to get rid of all the micro-plastic in the ocean. Some micro-plastics are the size of micro-plankton and bacteria. Our response to this issue will really be about stopping more plastic from making its way into the ocean.”
As millions of tonnes of micro-plastic waste mount in aquatic environments every year, scientists are calling for an urgent focus on research to understand the potential ramifications of this contamination to wildlife, the food web, and human health.
A recent study on plastic pollution released by Swiss-based scientific research firm Environmental Action revealed the understanding of paints role in plastic pollution was dramatically underestimated. The study finds that paint is the leading source of micro-plastics in our oceans and waterways. According to Environmental Action, an astounding 58% of micro-plastics in oceans and waterways began their lives as paint.
Plastic particles have been detected everywhere around the world, from wastewater to marine environments to freshwater systems, and in various environmental matrixes, including ambient air, soil, sediment, and biota. Among these, plastic wastes in urban waters (for example, drinking water, freshwater, receiving water, stormwater, sludges, and wastewater) are of growing concern as they are closely linked with human quality of life. Micro-plastic and nano-plastic debris in urban waters are considered troublesome pollutants due to their difficult removal and accumulation in human bodies through the food chain.
Nano-plastics remain homogeneously dispersed in water systems for quite a long time, which makes removal extremely difficult, whereas micro-plastics will sink or float. In addition to the challenges we face with the removal of nano-plastic contamination, studies have found nano-plastics have higher toxicity compared to micro-plastics in the ecosystem.
The omnipresent micro-plastics and nano-plastics in urban waters (especially drinking water, bottled water, and aquatic fish) render human exposure to tiny plastic particles inevitable, and recent reports have indicated the accumulation of different micro-plastics and nano-plastics particles in human bodies.
Despite the availability of water filters on the market, both industrial and commercial filters fall short of completely removing or preventing nano-plastics from being consumed. Most reverse osmosis filtration systems can remove micro-plastics, but not all. Currently, the best filtration system for removing micro-plastics is a reverse osmosis filtration system with a carbon pre-filter. However, for every one litre of filtered water, an average reverse osmosis water purifier wastes approximately three litres of water. While the purifier has numerous advantages, it wastes water due to its membrane technology and requires the use of additional water to clean the filter, which is then discarded.
A new study this year investigated the performance of different techniques when it comes to removing nano-plastics from water and discovered that biologically active systems known as slow sand filters can remove tiny particles with a 99.9 percent success rate. However, the process does suffer some setbacks, those being the additional costs involved due to the necessity of treating the water that is being disposed of and the problem of safe disposal of catchment sand to avoid secondary contamination. The slow sand study also found it was not very effective against all viruses and pathogens, and there was the issue of clogging filters.
Municipal and septic wastewater treatment processes produce both a solid and a liquid waste stream. The solid residues are referred to as sludge. The sludge is sent to drying lagoons, where it is air-dried for about one to two years to create biosolids, which look and smell like compost. Biosolids are treated sludge that is used by farmers to improve soil health and crop growth. That is, stabilised organic solids derived totally or in part from wastewater treatment processes can be used as a valuable resource for land applications. Sewage sludge is the most common end-use application to agricultural land in Australia, followed by landscaping and gardening applications.
There has been some attention to sludge and biosolids, and the impact they may be having on the environment and public health. As wastewater treatment plants are required to remove more and more substances, such as metals and pharmaceuticals; inevitably, some of these will end up in the sludge.
Approximately 79% of the plastic particles that enter waste water treatment plants will end up in the sludge phase or in biosolids. According to the literature, the amount of micro-plastics in sludge from waste water treatment plants worldwide ranges from approximately 1,000 particles per kg to just over 300,000 particles per kg.
Sludge, or biosolids, is a primary source of micro-plastics and nano-plastics entering and contaminating crop fields. Each year, millions of tonnes of micro-plastics are discharged into water bodies via wastewater treatment plants, with more than 98 percent of the smallest plastic particles from sewers retained in sludge and carried in the form of solids. As a result, the direct utilisation of such wastewater and biosolids in the form of irrigation and agricultural applications means we are ultimately responsible for contaminating and endangering our land.
Waste water treatment plant sludge as a fertiliser for agricultural applications has gained popularity due to its high organic and nutrient contents. In Australia, approximately 75% of sludge is repurposed for agricultural purposes. However, it has also been identified as one of the primary sources of micro-plastic contamination in soil.
Nano-plastics in the soil have been found to be as much as 20 times higher than those in the ocean. In the soil environment, plastic mulching, landfilling of plastic wastes, utilisation of sludge, wastewater irrigation, and atmospheric deposition are the prominent sources of micro-plastics and nano-plastics. Due to the widespread dispersal of micro-plastics and nano-plastics, it is unavoidable that there exists an environmental threat to the human food web that impedes yield and the nutritional quality of crops.
The results from a recent study showed that exposure to six different polymers in contaminated soil caused changes in soil enzyme activities, pH levels, nutrient availability, and microbial activities. In addition, micro-plastics and nano-plastics contaminated with organic and inorganic compounds may harm the growth of earthworms as well as other soil biota.
The studies documented the adverse impact micro and nano-plastics have on plant growth, including the direct absorption and accumulation of nano-plastics into plant cells and the alteration of different cellular activities in plants. nano-plastics block the cell wall pores and hinder water and nutrient uptake, resulting in interference with physiological processes.
Investigation from studies has also proven that micro and nano-plastics hinder the growth of wheat, corn, cress, and tomatoes and are highly noxious to the seedlings of rice. Their noxious effects on major crops may be a potential threat to the assurance of food security in the long run.
According to research, micro and nano-plastics are present in the roots, leaves, and stems of major food-producing cereals, pulses, and oil seed crops, as well as vegetables and fruits.
Micro-plastics are found in fruits and vegetables, like apples, broccoli, and carrots, with plants absorbing nano-plastics through their root systems via plastic-contaminated soil or irrigation water.
Growing food hydroponically does not escape the issue either. Hydroponic agriculture in a controlled environment is gaining popularity. These crops are directly used in the production of fresh vegetables for human consumption. Growing crops in plastic contaminated water may aid in the rapid uptake of nano-plastics by plants.
Micro and nano-plastics can now be found in all water sources.
As if there weren’t enough scary pollutants in our drinking water, a recent study revealed that most of us drink micro and nano-plastics every day. Worldwide, 83% of water samples contained micro-plastics In the U.S., an astonishing 94% of samples tested had micro-plastics. The particles are tiny enough to cross the walls of our digestive tracts and reach other organs and tissues.
Most acrylic paints cannot be recycled in their original form because they are not biodegradable. They can, however, be dropped off at a participating recycling location and some art stores for disposal with other acrylic waste. A problem with disposal still exists, and the likelihood of the paint receptacles entering landfill is very high.
In Australia, it is acceptable to dry out acrylic paint tubes and bottles, and once dry, simply throw the tube or bottle into the garbage bin. Imagine how much dried acrylic paint in plastic tubes and bottles and used paint pens (which are themselves non-biodegradable) end up in landfills every year worldwide? The amount would be staggering. These items do not simply vanish, they have to go somewhere.
Landfills can contaminate groundwater and cause loads of health issues. Landfills impact groundwater through the formation of leachate, often referred to as garbage soup. Rainwater can wash plastic particles from one place to another, facilitating the rapid dispersal of micro and nano-particles. Another method of garbage disposal is incineration. However, when acrylic paint is exposed to intense heat, it not only produces toxic chemicals which are released into the atmosphere, it creates airborne nano-plastics that will contaminate the environment wherever they land.
Wind also plays an important role in transporting tiny plastic particles from urban or industrial areas to crop-growing farms, even in remote rural areas. Natural disasters such as floods, storms, and even soil erosion can disperse these plastic particles, leading to an increase in micro and nano-plastics pollution. The increase in micro and nano-plastics in soil can cause crack formation, which can lead to more soil water evaporating and prolongs the drought period.
When the light intensity is high, plants naturally increase their transpiration rate to absorb water and related nutrients. According to research, transpiration pull is an important factor in increasing the uptake of nano-plastics from the soil as well as plant nutrients. This may amplify the impact of climate change on crop production. One way of reducing the impact currently is to stop using nano-plastic contaminated biosolids on agricultural land.
Micro and nano-plastics exposure causes a decline in 26 organic acids and 12 amino acids in rice plants, essential minerals critical for plant growth as well as human dietary mineral intake. The presence of micro and nano-plastics in major cereals, vegetables, and fruits not only reduces crop yield but also quality, which, when combined with other hazardous materials, may exacerbate the global problem of hidden hunger.
As mentioned previously, it has been established that plants can trap a significant amount of micro and nano-plastics, and it is a matter of concern that micro and nano-plastics can now be found in supermarket fruits and vegetables. The World Health Organisation recommends that each person consume 400g of vegetables and fruits in a single day. As a result, a significant amount of micro- and nano-plastics may be consumed by humans daily through fruits and vegetables alone. This statement is supported by the fact that approximately 200,000 plant species are edible worldwide.
An estimation of ingested micro and nano-plastics via dietary intake by humans is largely dependent on the extent of micro and nano-plastics exposure and the food habits of a specific region. As a result, the estimated rate of consumption will differ significantly across the globe.
For example, an Australian consumes approximately 1 g of plastic particles from rice per year based on per capita rice consumption. However, the quantity will be two to three times higher for people who eat rice as their main diet two to three times per day.
Information received from the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations states that there is currently no legislation worldwide that specifically regulates the presence of micro or nano-plastics in foodstuffs or in food safety protocols.
A wide range of micro and nano-plastic contaminated primary producers ensure our major food and nutritional needs, such as cereals, pulses, oilseed crops, vegetables, and fruits, will ultimately transfer from farm to dining table, resulting in the exposure of plastic to humans.
Exposure to the human body primarily occurs through ingestion and inhalation, resulting in a variety of health effects. The persistence of micro and nano-plastics, together with their chemical additives and adsorbed toxic pollutants, pose serious health risks to human bodies. Compared to micro-plastics, nano-plastics can more easily cross the gastrointestinal barrier in human bodies, enter the capillary blood system, and be further transported throughout the whole body.
Nano-plastics can also accumulate in tissues and cells, leading to local inflammation and metabolic disorders. Some particles might lodge in the intestinal wall. Others might be taken up by intestinal tissue to travel through the body’s lymphatic system. Particles can be taken into the body’s hepatic portal vein, which carries blood from the intestines, gallbladder, pancreas, and spleen to the liver. Smaller debris has been shown to enter the bloodstream before it lodges in the kidneys and liver, according to a 2016 report by the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation.
Human ingestion of micro and nano-plastics can result in a long list of health problems. Additives or plasticisers associated with micro and nano-plastics are linked to heart disease, chronic liver diseases, cancer, hormonal imbalances due to endocrine abnormalities, obesity, and diabetes, among other health issues. Plastic particles have been detected and quantified in human blood, and two different studies have shown that plastic was discovered in a human placenta.
My own research, which has come from simply wanting to dispose of some acrylic paint, has opened my eyes to a serious problem that exists. I understand that acrylic paint is just one issue that contributes to a much larger problem, but no matter how large or small the paint issue is, I will not add to the problem by ignoring the consequences of my actions purely to create art. No art or art supplies produced with synthetic products is worth the price we pay in the long run. Alternatives exist, and there are always better choices that can be made in this world.
Give acrylic paints, polymer-based products, acrylic art, and any other non-biodegradable art supply a miss. Artists can paint using mediums that do not impact the world in the same way plastic products do. Oil paints and watercolours have been around for thousands of years. Using linseed or walnut oil as a binder for oil painting, gum arabic from an acacia tree, or even honey as a binder for water colour paints are better choices than plastic pollution. There is no reasonable excuse an artist can use these days for continuing to contaminate our world, especially if the artist is drawing on nature for their inspiration. There is also no excuse to continue using plastic paints for commercial projects when interior and exterior natural and eco-friendly alternatives are available.
EARTH DAY 2024: PLANET VS. PLASTICS
It's time to become conscious of the effect plastics are having on our environment, our wildlife, our waterways, food production, and ourselves.