# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global Warming 101 | National Geographic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate Change and Global Warming: Explained in Simple Words for Beginners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change: Earth's giant game of Tetris - Joss Fong

# data[].attributes.headline
Minnesota Group Fighting Deforestation in the Rain Forest

# data[].attributes.subject
Minnesota Group Fighting Deforestation in the Rain Forest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Every hour, we're losing the equivalent of a thousand football fields of forests. We're also losing the animals that depend on these forests for their survival-including the fewer than 400 Sumatran tigers left on the planet as well as the critically endangered jaguar, orangutan and Bornean elephant.

Why are so many of these vitally important tropical forests and the wildlife they support being burned to the ground or otherwise destroyed? So some of the world's largest agricultural commodities companies can trade and sell soybeans, beef cattle and palm oil, much of it for U.S. consumption. That's a terrible and tragic trade-off.

Tropical forests also play a critical role in stabilizing our climate.

Tropical forests work like the planet's lungs, breathing in carbon dioxide and breathing out oxygen, reducing global warming and cleaning the air.

Cutting down these forests has the opposite effect. The leveled forest stops taking in carbon dioxide. When forests are burned, as often happens in tropical areas to "clear" the land, they release back into the atmosphere the carbon they've taken in over many years.

Scientists estimate that razing forests to make way for crops or cattle accounts for 10-15 percent of the pollution that's warming the planet and changing the climate.

If we want to save endangered species and slow global warming, we must stop burning and cutting down tropical forests.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To save endangered species, we must protect the world's tropical forests. Doing so will also help stabilize our climate. We're doing our part by urging companies to commit to stop cutting down these great forests-a commitment known as zero-deforestation. Many of the companies that harvest and use palm oil have already agreed to make this commitment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Would Banning Plastic Bottles Help or Hurt the Planet?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sign up for our newsletter

Download report

Tobacco doesn't just negatively impact the health of individuals, it also endangers the health of the environment. When e-cigarette and cigarette waste isn't disposed of properly, it makes its way into the environment where it ends up polluting water, air, and land with toxic chemicals, heavy metals and residual nicotine. An estimated 766,571 metric tons of cigarette butts make their way into the environment every year. Additionally, in 2018, Americans generated 2.7 million tons of consumer electronic waste, including e-cigarette waste, that ultimately ends up in landfills or incinerators.

Given that the largest U.S. cigarette companies sold about 217 billion cigarettes to wholesalers and retailers nationwide in 2018, it's no surprise that cigarette butts are the most frequently littered item in U.S. beaches and waterways and second most littered item globally. Cigarette butts are often disposed of in the environment, on streets, sidewalks, and other public areas, and may then be carried as runoff to drains and ultimately end up polluting rivers, beaches, and oceans. Because cigarette butts are primarily made of plastic filters that don't biodegrade, the butts that aren't eaten by wildlife simply pile up on shorelines or at the bottom of bodies of water.

The problem isn't limited to cigarettes. Retail e-cigarette sales more than doubled, with a 122.2% increase in total units from September 2014-May 2020. This increase in single-use e-cigarette products will eventually become tons of e-cigarette waste as these products reach end-of-life. Disposing of e-cigarette waste in an environmentally safe and friendly way is a growing problem, especially given the rise of single-use and disposable e-cigarettes. E-cigarette cartridges, such as JUUL pods, are single-use products that contain plastic, electronic and chemical waste and many of them may also end up as litter. Inexpensive, flavored disposable e-cigarettes such as Puff Bar, which doubled their market share in just 10 months from August 2019 to May 2020, are gaining popularity and further contribute to e-cigarette waste.

LITTER

CIGARETTES

Cigarette butts comprise 30%-40% of items collected in annual coastal/urban cleanups.

Cigarette butts are the most prominently littered item on U.S. roadways, retail areas, storm drains, loading docks, construction sites and recreational areas.

In 2019, cigarette butts were the most littered item in U.S. beaches and waterways, with close to a million (900,178) pieces collected.

4,211,962 cigarette butts were collected on beaches and waterways globally in 2019, making them the world's second most common type of litter after food wrappers.

12,089 cigarette lighters, 58,672 cigar tips and 33,865 tobacco packages or wrappers were removed from U.S. waterways in 2015.

86% of smokers consider cigarette butts to be litter, but 75% of smokers throw them on the ground or out of a car window.

Smokers litter as many as 65% of their cigarette butts.

E-CIGARETTES

E-cigarette-related waste is potentially a more serious environmental threat than cigarette butts because it contains metal, circuitry, single-use plastic cartridges, batteries and toxic chemicals in e-liquids.

E-cigarette manufacturers do not provide guidance to consumers on how to dispose of used devices or pod/cartridge products, and there are no receptacles or specific processes in place.

A Truth Initiative survey found that almost half (46.9%) of e-cigarette device owners said that the e-cigarette/vape device they currently use does not provide any disposal information such as where to send used batteries or empty pods. The survey also found that more than half (57.8%) of those who had vaped in the past 30 days found it inconvenient to dispose of e-cigarette waste responsibly.

BIODEGRADABILITY
CIGARETTES
Cigarette filters are made from cellulose acetate, a plastic which only degrades under severe biological circumstances, such as when filters collect in sewage. In practice, cigarette butts tossed on streets and beaches do not biodegrade.

Under optimal conditions, it can take at least nine months for a cigarette butt to degrade.

The sun may break cigarette butts down, but only into smaller pieces of waste which dilute into water/soil.

Growing concerns over the impact of tobacco waste on the environment, as well as the substantial costs of cleanup, have prompted states, municipalities and institutions to enact a variety of policy actions. For example, 317 municipalities prohibited smoking on beaches and 1,531 prohibited smoking in parks as of October 2017.
E-CIGARETTES
Unlike cigarette butts, e-cigarette waste cannot biodegrade even under severe conditions. E-cigarette cartridges discarded on streets mix with leaf litter and get pushed around by weather events, eventually breaking down into microplastics and chemicals that flow into storm drains to pollute waterways and wildlife. The DEA advises to contact local waste departments about their household hazardous waste (HHW) program to see if they accept e-cigarettes, and if that is not an option, remove the battery (if possible) and bring the battery to recycling. After the battery has been removed, the rest of the e-cigarette can be brought to DEA prescription take-back days.

E-cigarette manufacturers do not provide guidance to consumers on how to dispose of used devices or pod/cartridge products.

LAND, COASTAL AND WATER POLLUTION

Cigarette and e-cigarette waste can pollute soil, beaches and waterways. Studies have also shown that cigarette and e-cigarette waste is harmful to wildlife.
CIGARETTES

Cigarette butts cause pollution by being carried, as runoff, to drains and from there to rivers, beaches and oceans.

Preliminary studies show that organic compounds (such as nicotine, pesticide residues and metal) seep from cigarette butts into aquatic ecosystems, becoming acutely toxic to fish and microorganisms.

In one laboratory study, the chemicals that leached from a single cigarette butt (soaked for 24 hours in a liter of water) released enough toxins to kill 50 percent of the saltwater and freshwater fish exposed to it for 96 hours.

Another laboratory study found that cigarette butts can be a source for heavy metal contamination in water, which may harm local organisms.

A study of the effects of roadside waste on soil found that patterns of hydrocarbon levels in the soil were similar to those of littered cigarette butts. This indicates that the chemicals in the soil had seeped out of cigarette butts. Some hydrocarbons are carcinogenic.

E-CIGARETTES

Both the batteries and e-cigarette devices contain hazardous substances such as lead and mercury.

Lithium-ion batteries in e-cigarettes have been known to explode and cause fires in garbage trucks and waste management plants if damaged or exposed to extreme heat. According to a California survey, 56% of the fires at waste facilities between 2016-2018 were reported to have been caused by batteries, mostly lithium-ion ones.

Incompletely used liquid cartridges and refills contain nicotine salts and heavy metals, which can leach into soil and waterways or be ingested by wildlife.

Before lithium-ion batteries can be placed in the trash, they need to be fully discharged and cooled, submerged in cold saltwater for two weeks - covered securely with a lid - and wrapped in newspaper.

Cigarette butts cause pollution by being carried, as runoff, to drains and from there to rivers, beaches and oceans.

GROWING AND MANUFACTURING TOBACCO PRODUCTS

813,925 pounds of toxic chemicals were released from U.S. tobacco facilities in 2018. This number is down from 1,312,796 pounds in 2015 likely in part due to the decline in cigarette smoking and the industry's shifting focus to newer electronic products.

Research has found that growing tobacco contributes to deforestation, especially in the developing world. Deforestation for tobacco plantations promotes soil degradation and "failing yields" or the capacity for the land to support the growth of any other crops or vegetation.

Tobacco farmers typically clear land by burning it. But this land is often agriculturally marginal and is abandoned after only a few seasons, contributing in many cases to desertification. Burning increases greenhouse gas levels by generating water and air pollutants, and decreasing forest cover which would otherwise absorb the 16 million metric tons of CO2 produced by tobacco production. Shutting down the tobacco industry would equate to taking 16 million cars off the streets every single year.

Tobacco production uses up more water and wood, and has more pesticides applied to it, than most other crops, further affecting water supplies and contamination of the soil.

CIGARETTES

Approximately 600 million trees are chopped down every year by the tobacco industry. On average each tree produces enough paper for 15 packs of cigarettes.

Tobacco farming and the tobacco industry are a sizeable contributor to deforestation in many countries around the world.

E-CIGARETTES

Since e-cigarettes quickly rose in popularity in an under-regulated environment, we know little about how e-cigarettes are manufactured and the environmental impact of the production process. Thus far, research and policy on e-cigarettes has focused on the youth epidemic and lack of regulation rather than the product's environmental impact.

E-cigarette companies were required to submit information by September 9, 2020 on the environmental impact of their products as part of applications to the Food and Drug Administration to keep their products on the market, but this information is not yet publicly available.

INDUSTRY ACCOUNTABILITY FOR TOBACCO WASTE

Many e-cigarette manufacturers simply direct users to hazardous waste/electronic waste disposal companies, which often don't accept e-cigarettes.

From the cellulose acetate of cigarette butts to e-liquid residue and batteries, waste management and hazardous waste disposal plants are not currently equipped to handle either type of waste. Federal regulations have not yet caught up to the need for guidance on disposal.

Starting in 2019, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) began accepting e-cigarette devices and cartridges during their annual National Prescription Take Back Day, although the DEA cannot accept devices containing lithium ion batteries.

Currently, there is no industry guideline for recycling e-cigarettes in the U.S and no documented baseline standards for end-of-life disposal by manufacturers. There is no requirement in place to hold manufacturers accountable for the post-consumer waste they helped produce or to devise a clear and safe system to dispose of these items as hazardous materials or e-waste.

Even though guidance exists on best practices for holding companies like tobacco manufacturers accountable for reducing or disposing of the post-consumer waste that results from use of their products, they are not currently enforced across the industry by any governing body including the Environmental Protection Agency.

States and local agencies that have the authority to enforce hazardous waste penalties can help reduce the environmental impact. As of January 2020, the EPA states that, violators of hazardous waste requirements can incur civil penalties of up to $75,867 per day. In 2006, Washington state became one of the first states in the nation to pass a law putting the responsibility for recycling e-waste on the producer, not taxpayers. Manufacturers that produce electronics were required to pay for and manage their recycling.

Tobacco manufacturers need to be held responsible for the extreme amounts of waste that their products create.

TOBACCO INDUSTRY NEGLIGENCE

The tobacco industry is responsible for producing much more than tobacco products - they are guilty of creating hundreds of thousands of pounds of cigarette and e-cigarette waste each year. Cigarette and e-cigarette waste present serious threats to the ecosystem and requires a long-term solution. Instead of accepting responsibility for their products, tobacco companies are using the environmental problems associated with tobacco products as a ploy for positive press attention.

Some tobacco companies have included reducing the amount of cigarette butts in the environment as part of their sustainability goals. For example, American Spirit continues its "inspirational" themed environmental messaging in 2021 with a new "Stronger Together" slogan and reaffirmation of their goal to help recycle a half-billion cigarette butts by 2025, and Philip Morris International claims it endeavors to reduce plastic litter from its products by 50% from 2021 to 2025 as part of its "Our World Is Not an Ashtray" initiative. Campaigns like this are hypocritical and misleading to the public. The tobacco industry not only created this new waste stream in the first place, they are trying to cover up their harmful practices through misdirection and public displays of eco-activism.

POLICIES TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT

Tobacco manufacturers need to be held responsible for the extreme amounts of waste that their products create and to facilitate the environmentally safe disposal of their products - both combustible and electronic. Strong local regulations coupled with financial penalties to reduce the amount of e-cigarette waste are needed to reduce the negative environmental consequences from their products. Increasing consumer awareness of the environmental toxicity and dangers posed by discarding cigarette and e-cigarette related waste into landfills and encouraging smokers and vapers to quit using these products altogether are the best ways to protect the environment from tobacco product waste.

Download report

More in harmful effects of tobacco

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sign up for our newsletter Download report Tobacco doesn't just negatively impact the health of individuals, it also endangers the health of the environment. When e-cigarette and cigarette waste isn't disposed of properly, it makes its way into the environment where it ends up polluting water, air, and land with toxic chemicals, heavy metals and residual nicotine.

# data[].attributes.body
A bunch of links to sources about environmental issues. Check it out!

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.pca.state.mn.us/hows-the-water

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The health of water resources in Minnesota depends on actions of citizens to restore impaired waters in the state.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Recycling and Energy Conservation: Kids' Version

# data[].attributes.headline
Plastics to Avoid If You Want to Save the Planet

# data[].attributes.subject
Plastics to Avoid If You Want to Save the Planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Ten "stealth microplastics" to avoid if you want to save the oceans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Reducing the amount of plastic in our everyday lives can have a positive impact on the environment

# data[].attributes.headline
Factory Farming Killing Animals & Our Planet

# data[].attributes.subject
Factory Farming Killing Animals & Our Planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Interview: Why factory farming is not just cruel - but also a threat to all life on the planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's time the world woke up to the real impact of modern, industrial farming, says Philip Lymbery, author of "Farmageddon" and "Deadzone."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Habitat loss and degradation

Loss and degradation of terrestrial and aquatic habitats are the primary causes of species' rarity in Minnesota. Habitat degradation includes loss of diversity, fragmentation, disruption of critical processes such as fire, and water quality degradation due to pollutant chemicals, nutrient input, or sedimentation/siltation.

The prairie vole was once a common species in the Great Plains, including the tall grass prairie in southern and western Minnesota. Today, it is uncommon in the state due almost exclusively to the destruction of its prairie habitat through plowing and over-grazing.

Invasive species and competition

Nonnative invasive species and native species outside of their natural range contribute to the decline and elimination of native species by carrying disease, altering and degrading habitat, and competing with or preying on native species.

The viability of remaining Higgins eye mussel populations in Minnesota is jeopardized by the infestation of nonnative zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) in the Mississippi River and its tributaries. Zebra mussels can attach themselves in large numbers to the shells of native mussels, eventually causing death by suffocation.

Pollution

Contaminants such as pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, and automobile and industrial emissions, as well as sedimentation and siltation in aquatic systems, continue to play a role in the decline of many species in Minnesota. Species can be affected directly by the toxicity of pollutants, or indirectly by the influence that pollutants have on their food resources.

Lead poisoning is one of the greatest threats to trumpeter swans in Minnesota and responsible for about 40% of the swan fatalities in the state. Trumpeter swans ingest lead fishing sinkers and lead shots when they eat grit and forage for tubers and roots from marsh and lake bottoms.

Habitat specificity

Some species are rare because they depend on rare, declining, or vulnerable habitats in Minnesota.

The southern brook lamprey requires different microhabitats during different portions of its life history. Adults need very clear, small to large streams and rivers, with swift, permanent flow over sand and gravel riffles. Larvae need fine sediment or organic debris in areas with embedded woody debris for burrowing, usually in lower gradient stream segments.

Persecution and exploitation

Some species in Minnesota are negatively impacted by recreational or commercial overexploitation (e.g., reptiles, orchids, medicinal herbs) or by indiscriminate killing due to some perceived threat or undesirable quality.

The major cause of the timber rattlesnake's decline in Minnesota is its vulnerability to systematic and willful destruction by humans. Snakes at den sites are particularly vulnerable to disturbance and poaching.

Peripheral populations

Some species are considered rare in Minnesota because of where they exist in relation to their entire range. As species reach the far edges of their natural range, they may become less common, and may be considered rare if their populations are low in numbers or geographically limited.

The Laurentian tiger beetle is known only from Ontario, Manitoba, and Minnesota, and is apparently found only north of the Laurentian Divide in Minnesota.

Vulnerable characteristics

Some species are rare in Minnesota because they have certain characteristics that make them vulnerable. Some species require large home ranges or habitat patch sizes, some have low dispersal abilities or low reproductive rates, some are highly localized or have a restricted distribution (endemic species), and some concentrate their populations during some time of the year (such as bats clustering in hibernacula).

The dwarf trout lily is endemic to Minnesota, occurring worldwide only in Rice, Goodhue, and Steele counties. Because of its inefficient system of reproduction and dispersal, the dwarf trout lily has expanded its range very little and remains restricted to small portions of certain drainage systems in just these three counties.

Relict populations

Relict species were probably once more common in Minnesota when the climate was different than it is today. As the climate changed, most populations of these species were eliminated, but small, isolated populations survived in appropriate habitats.

The bluff vertigo is a rare landsnail found in a small number of sites in southeastern Minnesota. This species was more widespread during the Wisconsin glacial period (12,000 years ago), but it now survives only as small relict populations with very specific habitat requirements.

Disease

Introduced diseases and native diseases outside of their natural range can contribute to the decline of native species either through direct mortality or by increasing species' vulnerability to other limiting factors.

The emergence of white-nose syndrome, a fungal disease that is decimating hibernating bat populations in the eastern United States, poses a potential threat to northern myotis populations in Minnesota.

Global climate change

The complexities of global climate change present uncertainty in anticipating its impacts on rare species in Minnesota. It is reasonable to expect that climate changes that result in warmer, dryer weather will alter critical habitats that support many rare species. These changes in habitat may ultimately lead to extirpation of populations of rare species.

Textured lungwort grows on trees and mossy rocks in moist areas. Any environmental changes that disrupt the humidity of its habitat, such as global warming, will likely have a negative effect on this rare lichen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Loss and degradation of terrestrial and aquatic habitats are the primary causes of species' rarity in Minnesota. Habitat degradation includes loss of diversity, fragmentation, disruption of critical processes such as fire, and water quality degradation due to pollutant chemicals, nutrient input, or sedimentation/siltation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article was created in partnership with the National Geographic Society.

Smokers around the world buy roughly 6.5 trillion cigarettes each year. That's 18 billion every day. While most of a cigarette's innards and paper wrapping disintegrate when smoked, not everything gets burned. Trillions of cigarette filters-also known as butts or ends-are left over, only an estimated third of which make it into the trash. The rest are casually flung into the street or out a window.

"There's something about flicking that cigarette butt," says Cindy Zipf, executive director of Clean Ocean Action. "It's so automatic."

Cigarette filters are made of a plastic called cellulose acetate. When tossed into the environment, they dump not only that plastic, but also the nicotine, heavy metals, and many other chemicals they've absorbed into the surrounding environment.

A recent study found that cigarette butts inhibit plant growth. They also routinely get into waterways, and eventually oceans.

Zipf said cigarette butts have long been at or near the top of the list of items her organization finds during beach cleanups. The billions more that remain in the water are hazardous to marine animals, which can eat them, she said.

"They look a lot more like a morsel of food on a sea surface," says Zipf.

The pollution problem has only gotten worse in recent years as e-cigarettes have become more popular, she said, because those too are largely made of plastic.

"It's becoming so pervasive," says Zipf, of both e-cigarette use and the accompanying plastic waste. "It's just a different form of the same thing."

From tobacco to plastics

People have been smoking or chewing tobacco for millennia. By the 1800s paper cigarettes had joined cigars, pipes, and snuff as common forms of tobacco consumption. But the invention of the cigarette rolling machine at the end of the century-which drastically increased production-started the cigarette on its path to popularity.

The 20th century saw an explosion of smoking. In 1900 American adults smoked an average of 54 cigarettes per year. By 1960, that number had climbed to more than 4,000. For most of that period, cigarette filters were nonexistent. But, slowly, the health impacts of smoking became clear.

Starting in the late 1930s, scientists began making connections between cigarettes and public health risks. In 1957 the Surgeon General officially declared a causal link between smoking and lung cancer. By 1964 the agency had commissioned and released a comprehensive report highlighting "a 70 percent increase in the mortality rate of smokers over non-smokers."

As public concern mounted, the tobacco companies scrambled for solutions, one of which was cigarette filters.

"There was this whole attempt to reduce tar and nicotine," says Tom Novotny, an epidemiologist at San Diego State University who was one of the first people to research the environmental impacts of cigarettes.

Tobacco companies, Novotny said, tried a variety of different filter materials, such as cotton, charcoal, and food starch, before landing on a plastic fiber called cellulose acetate, which remains the polymer of choice today.

"There's still widespread misunderstanding about what [filters] are made of," says Novotny. " A lot of smokers think it's biodegradable already."

Filters can take years to degrade and, even as they do, they break down into tiny pieces of plastic, called microplastics, which are an increasing hazard in waterways and oceans. Cigarette butts also carry a heavy load of toxic materials that can be harmful to nearby marine life, a threat that Novotny tested in the lab.

"One cigarette butt in a liter [of water]," he said of his findings, "kills half the fish."

When Cindy Zipf goes out on her beach cleanups, it's normal for her to find cigarette butts. But about five years ago Zipf started to see a new kind of plastic item: e-cigarettes.

"They're hard plastic all around," she says. "They look like little drives for computers."

Electronic cigarettes generally consist of four components: the cartridge or pod that holds the "e-juice" solution, a heating element, a battery, and a mouthpiece. While the pods are now replaceable, at first the whole contraption was entirely single-use. The plastic and circuitry all went straight into the garbage-or the street.

The use of e-cigarettes has skyrocketed. The leading manufacturer, Juul, for example, saw its sales increase nearly sevenfold between 2014 and 2017. The FDA called the rise in use among youth especially " startling." Today, more than 10 million Americans use e-cigarettes.

As the prevalence of e-cigarettes has grown, so has the need to get rid of the waste. But their mix of electronic components and nicotine puts them in a grey area for disposal, said Yogi Hendlin, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco and one of the leading researchers on the subject.

"E-cigarettes are viewed both as hazardous waste and e-waste," he explains, noting that when he goes to high schools, he often finds "hundreds" of Juul pods in the parking lot. "From the regulatory side we haven't been able to find a way to deal with this."

The effects of e-cigarette waste on the environment are only starting to be studied. Novotny, for instance, has begun looking into the toxicity to marine life, as he did with cigarette butts.

On beaches, Zipf said the plastic pods were piling up so fast that her organization was considering making them a permanent fixture of the collection scorecard that volunteers take with them as they tally items.

Zipf says: "We seem to keep coming up with new and different uses-wasteful uses-for plastic."

The city of San Francisco spends some $7.5 million a year cleaning up cigarette butts, and is far from the only municipality dealing with such waste.

"It's the last remaining acceptable form of littering," says Novotny. "People are more likely to pick up their dog poop than cigarette butts."

Novotny proposes a radical solution: Ban cigarette butts altogether.

Filters, he said, haven't been shown to improve health outcomes. They may even be making the problem worse because they make smoking a less harsh experience and give people a sense that they are doing less harm. He also notes the environmental benefits, and has argued for a ban on single-use plastic filters, a step that the California state senate is currently considering.

"It's a major intervention that I think could work," he says.

Hendlin agreed that change was only likely to come through legislative pressure. He pointed to documents showing that the R.J. Reynolds tobacco company was exploring biodegradable filters as far back as the 1970s, yet cellulose acetate remains the standard today. Most companies, he says, have also explored alternative filter materials, but "haven't pulled the trigger because they haven't been forced."

"They are ready, if unwilling," says Hendlin.

Companies argue that filters are key to keeping emissions in line with regulations and that it's consumers who are holding up adoption of filter replacements.

Imperial, one of the largest tobacco brands in the country, tested paper filters in France, but according to a spokesperson, "Sadly, it was commercially unsuccessful." Consumers, he said, didn't like the taste.

As Simon Cleverly, with British American Tobacco, puts it: "There is currently no feasible alternative to cellulose acetate for filters."

A number of companies claim to make more environmentally friendly products, such as Smokey Treats and Greenbutts. The president of Greenbutts, Tadas Lisauskas, says the company is in negotiations with major manufacturers to implement their filters. But both Novotny and Hendlin are skeptical that startups like these address the root of the problem: people's proclivity to litter cigarette butts.

E-cigarettes pose a similarly vexing plastic problem. The pods must be rinsed before being thrown in the normal trash and as of 2018, Juul tweeted, it didn't "currently have a recycling program available."

Hendlin says reengineering e-cigarettes to use less, or no, plastic would be an expensive proposition that companies seem loathe to undertake. He suggests that a deposit system, such as the one for propane canisters, might be a better route.

"When you went to buy your next set of pods," he says, "you exchange your old cartridges for your new ones and you get your [money] back."

A spokesperson for Juul Labs says the company is already exploring a similar option and testing it internally. "We are committed to responsible stewardship and environmental sustainability," he says in an email. "We take environmental impact seriously."

There have been some steps toward addressing the plastic hazards that cigarettes pose. In 2016 India banned the use of plastic packaging for tobacco products. This year in New Jersey, a law went into effect that limits smoking and vaping in public parks and on beaches. But Zipf says many people will probably continue to flick their butts or drop their pods-and the plastics that accompany them-where they aren't supposed to.

"I think it's ignorance of convenience," she says. "There's really no excuse for it."

National Geographic is committed to reducing plastics pollution. Learn more about our non-profit activities at natgeo.org/plastics. This story is part ofPlanet or Plastic?-our multiyear effort to raise awareness about the global plastic waste crisis. Learn what you can do toreduce your own single-use plastics, andtake your pledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cigarette butts are toxic plastic pollution. Should they be banned?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article was created in partnership with the National Geographic Society. Smokers around the world buy roughly 6.5 trillion cigarettes each year. That's 18 billion every day. While most of a cigarette's innards and paper wrapping disintegrate when smoked, not everything gets burned.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Imagine if safari-goers in Africa came upon an elephant trudging through the brush covered in a tangle of ropes and netting. What if, on closer inspection, they found that the animal's mouth was blocked, preventing it from eating, or that lengths of rope had coiled around and cut into its legs, making every stride a battle? Imagine if the last thing those tourists saw was the elephant disappearing into the forest, dragging a veritable ball and chain of man-made debris behind it.

Unfortunately, this hypothetical scenario comes pretty close to the actual, real-life nightmare suffered on a daily basis by a different creature, the North Atlantic right whale, in its primary habitat off the east coast of the United States and Canada.

"It's a horrific animal welfare issue, but because it's out there in the ocean, we generally can't see it," says Francine Kershaw, a scientist with NRDC's Marine Mammal Protection Project.

Only about 400 North Atlantic right whales remain on earth, and of that tiny population, 83 percent bear scars from entanglements in fishing gear. Around half of those have been entangled more than once. All in all, entanglement is now the number one cause of death for this endangered species, responsible for 85 percent of all diagnosable deaths between 2010 and 2016.

Over the past few decades, the North Atlantic right whale had been seeing slow but steady gains, thanks to international efforts to protect critical habitats, move shipping lanes away from the whales, and develop methods to monitor the whales' health. But the population peaked around 2010 and is now in decline. At least 28 animals have died from human activities since 2017, and 2 percent of the population was lost in the summer of 2019 alone. Now, no North Atlantic right whale dies of old age.

It gets worse. "It seems the females have been recovering less well than males," says Kershaw. Of the 400 or so animals remaining, fewer than 95 are breeding females. What's more, Kershaw says, females used to live for about 60 to 70 years but are now making it only to around 30 or 40. And whereas they produced a calf every three years in the 1980s, females are now raising a baby whale just about once per decade.

The animals are losing their ability to replace their dead. And for such slow-to-mature, slow-to-reproduce animals, a trend like that can go on for only so long. "At this rate of decline, they're estimated to be functionally extinct in just a few decades," says Kershaw.

The Simpsons may outlast them.

Are you ready for the good news? We already have a solution on hand to reverse their fate. It's called ropeless gear.

To understand why such a simple, tangible fix could play a key role in boosting the species' numbers, it's important to understand the main cause of right whale entanglements. Various fishing industries employ long, vertical ropes, such as those that connect lobster and crab traps and pots on the ocean floor to buoys at the water's surface. These lines allow fishermen to find their traps and pots once they've dropped them. When whales run into these lines, their first instinct is to roll, which is how they become ensnared. Sometimes the ropes trap the whales and drown them, but more often the whales break the traps and pots from their moorings and escape-albeit with literally tons of gear in tow. These tethers cut into the animals' skin and force them to spend more calories than normal just to swim. Kershaw points out that some ensnared whales may starve to death over time as a result.

But attaching traps and pots to long ropes is not the only way for fishermen to find their gear. Ropeless technology provides new methods for locating that equipment without posing threats to the whales. "This is not a pie-in-the-sky idea," says Caroline Good, a marine ecologist and scientific consultant. "This is something that can be implemented and actually is being used right now in some parts of the world."

One method is to tag gear with GPS and then grab it using a grappling hook. In fact, fishermen are already doing this in Florida's golden crab fishery, even in waters up to 800 feet deep. But Good says grappling hooks may be too simplistic to apply in much larger fisheries, like the crab and lobster operations of New England and Canada's Atlantic provinces. For these areas, acoustic retrieval mechanisms probably have the most promise. These systems would allow fishermen to send a signal down to their gear that either triggers the release of a guide rope or the inflation of a buoy to cause the whole kit and caboodle to surface. As Good points out, this technology is not new-it's been used for decades by the military, the oil and gas industry, geologists, and other researchers. "It's just the idea of using it for fisheries that's new," she says.

Of course, a host of issues will need to be sorted out before ropeless gear can be implemented widely. For starters, fishermen will need a new way to know where their colleagues are deploying nets and traps so that they don't accidentally lay another set down on top. Similarly, operators of other fisheries, especially those using trawl nets or dragnets, will need to be looped into the system to keep from inadvertently plowing through the buoy-less gear. And finally, law enforcement will need to find a way to retain access to the submerged gear for inspection.

But these and other issues are solvable, so long as all stakeholders are included in the industry's evolution. "We feel it's very important for this to be done in partnership with the fishing industry," says Kershaw, "and it's imperative that the National Marine Fisheries Service show greater leadership."

Of course, ropeless gear alone can't save the North Atlantic right whale. Kershaw says it's crucial that the National Marine Fisheries Service issue a new suite of strong and effective fishing regulations by early 2020. It's also important that we continue to push back against the oil and gas industry's use of seismic testing and the U.S. Navy's use of military sonar, as both have been linked to increased stress and negative health effects in whales and other marine mammals. It's also critical that we fight to defend the Marine Mammal Protection Act, under threat by the Trump administration's plan to expand offshore drilling to nearly all American waters, among various other pieces of proposed legislation.

In summation, if we want to save the North Atlantic right whales from going extinct, we'll need to play both the short game and the long. Luckily, the whales may yet have a few tricks up their sleeves too.

No new calves were found in 2018, and only seven were born in 2019, well below what would be expected in a healthy population. It certainly sounds like bad news, but you could also consider it a survival mechanism for the whale females. Or at the very least, the lesser of two scary scenarios.

"The real disaster would be emaciated moms giving birth to calves that they then cannot nurse because they don't have enough fat," Good says. This could lead to the deaths of both the mothers and the calves, which would essentially be the last nail in the coffin. Instead, years without calves may occur when the female whales' bodies save them from the intense energy expenditure required to produce and rear a calf.

"From an evolutionary, long-term standpoint, their bodies know what to do," says Good. In other words, the North Atlantic right whales are doing all they can to save themselves. As for their future, it's up to us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's Happening to the North Atlantic Right Whale Is Just Plain Wrong

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Imagine if safari-goers in Africa came upon an elephant trudging through the brush covered in a tangle of ropes and netting. What if, on closer inspection, they found that the animal's mouth was blocked, preventing it from eating, or that lengths of rope had coiled around and cut into its legs, making every stride a battle?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Successes

Cut supply routes - WDC supporters like you helped persuade the EU Parliament to vote in favor of stopping whale meat being moved through EU ports.

Laws changed - WDC completed a review of Danish regulations on whale meat imports into Denmark which resulted in changes to Danish law, and rules for import are now much stricter.

Rallying support - WDC ran a campaign to call on the EU Parliament to make whaling a deal-breaker in trade negotiations with Japan, and collected almost 270,000 signatures. The petition is now being considered in the final decision on the trade agreement.

Online whale meat sales stopped - WDC exposed and stopped illegal online whale meat sales in Japan - including in dog treats!

Icelandic tourists shun whale meat - we are telling tourists that they are propping up a dying industry. A decade ago, 40% of tourists sampled whale meat: today, the figure is around 12%.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Information and facts about whaling - Whale & Dolphin Conservation USA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Whaling is cruel and unnecessary and must stop. Every year, Japan, Norway and Iceland kill around 1,500 whales between them.

# data[].attributes.headline
How Humans Are Turning the World Into Plastic

# data[].attributes.subject
How Humans Are Turning the World Into Plastic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Modern life would be impossible without plastic - but we have long since lost control over our invention. Why has plastic turned into a problem and what do we know about its dangers? This video is a collaboration with UN Environment and their Clean Seas campaign, If you want to take action to turn the tide on plastics, go to cleanseas and make your pledge. We also partnered with askscience on reddit - on you can talk to experts and ask questions about about plastic pollution today!

Sources used in the video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastic pollution: how humans are turning the world into plastic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Modern life would be impossible without plastic - but we have long since lost control over our invention. Why has plastic turned into a problem and what do we know about its dangers?

# data[].attributes.body
National Geographic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The global campaign to gain control of plastic waste is one of the fastest-growing environmental causes ever mounted. Yet it hasn't been enough to make a dent in the growing tonnage of discarded plastic that ends up in the seas.

In the next 10 years, the waste that slides into waterways, and ultimately the oceans, will reach 22 million tons and possibly as much as 58 million tons a year. And that's the "good" news-because that estimate takes into account thousands of ambitious commitments by government and industry to reduce plastic pollution.

Without those pledges, a business-as-usual scenario would be almost twice as bad. With no improvements to managing waste beyond what's already in place today, 99 million tons of uncontrolled plastic waste would end up in the environment by 2030.

These two scenarios, the result of new research by an international team of scientists, are a far cry from the first global tally published in 2015, which estimated that an average of 8.8 million tons flow into the oceans annually. That was a figure so startling to the world when it was published five years ago, it helped invigorate the plastic trash movement.

Jenna Jambeck, the University of Georgia engineering professor who calculated that number, also came up with a vivid analogy to put it in context. It would be the equivalent of one dump truck tipping a load of plastic into the ocean every minute every day for a year. Jambeck is also part of the team that came up with the new calculations. But coming up with a new way to visualize 22 to 58 million tons proved a challenge.

"I don't know. We're getting into the realm of what's incomprehensible," she says. "How about a football stadium filled with plastic every day? Or enough plastic to cover Rhode Island or the country of Luxembourg ankle deep?"

Neither of these new analogies, while accurate, capture the magnitude of what's at stake. (More: We're drowning in plastic-find out why.)

Like climate change, a lot rides on how the global community responds in the next couple of decades. And, though the parallels between the problem of plastic waste and climate change are obvious-both are rooted in oil, the basic ingredient to make plastics, they are dissimilar in one key way: plastic's persistence. While there is some possibility, however remote, that technology and restoration of natural ecosystems could remove CO ₂ from the atmosphere, there is no such analog for plastic. Virtually indestructible, it doesn't disappear.

"For me, the biggest issue is the question of permanence," says George Leonard, the Ocean Conservancy's chief scientist and a member of the team that produced this newest forecast. "If we don't get the plastic pollution problem in the ocean under control, we threaten contaminating the entire marine food web, from phytoplankton to whales. And by the time the science catches up to this, perhaps definitively concluding that this is problematic, it will be too late. We will not be able to go back. That massive amount of plastic will be embedded in the ocean's wildlife essentially forever."

The power of two

The analysis is the second in recent weeks to look ahead to the future of the plastic economy and conclude that correcting the waste problem-40 percent of plastic manufactured today is disposable packaging-requires a fundamental change in thinking about how plastics are made, used, and discarded.

The new findings were made by a team of scientists funded by the National Science Foundation through the University of Maryland's National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center ( SESYNC). The other project, which looks ahead to 2040, was led by the Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, a London-based environmental advisory and investment firm, and was first made public in July. Both studies were published together in the journal in September.

What's unusual is that two independent scientific working groups, using differing methodologies and timelines, reached the same broad conclusions. Both laid blame for the rising tonnage of plastic in the seas on the growth of plastic production that is outpacing the world's ability to keep up with collecting plastic trash. They also agreed that reducing surging waste requires reducing surging production of virgin plastic.

"The magnitude of the problem is the same. The difference is in methodology," says Stephanie Borrelle, a marine biologist in New Zealand and lead author of the SESYNC study. "We have to do something about this and do it soon. Our annual count of leakage doesn't account for what's already in the oceans."

Both projects also concluded that plastic waste could be significantly reduced, though not eliminated, using existing technologies. That includes improving waste collection and recycling, redesigning products to eliminate packaging made from unrecyclable plastics, expanding refillables, and in some cases substituting other materials. But solutions such as recycling, now globally hovering around 12 percent, would also require a massive scaling-up with many additional recycling facilities that don't exist.

The SESYNC project also calls for cleaning up plastic waste from shorelines, where possible. To give an idea of the scale involved in achieving that goal, it would require a billion people to participate in the Ocean Conservancy's annual beach cleanup that now attracts about one million volunteers.

"The inconvenient truth now is that this business-as-usual growth in production of new plastics is not compatible with ending plastics in nature," says Ben Dixon, a former sustainability manager at Royal Dutch Shell and partner at SYSTEMIQ. "That's the inconvenient truth both studies get to the heart of. We may see more pressures from investors, customers, and a changing of the world underneath the feet of these companies."

Both projects captured the attention of the plastics industry, which was quick to praise the research, but dismissed the idea of reducing production of virgin plastic as "highly counterproductive and impractical," in the words of the American Chemistry Council, a trade group for the petrochemical industry. In emailed responses, ExxonMobil and Dow Chemical, two of the world's leading manufacturers of polyethylene, agreed.

"Reducing production to solve the waste problem will, in turn, aggravate the carbon and climate problem as alternative materials have higher emissions," Dow said.

The manufacturing of plastic emits less CO2 and uses less water than for glass or aluminum. Some argue that such accounting doesn't always factor in all the costs, such as environmental cleanup and weight. Glass manufacturing emits less CO2 per gram, but glass bottles are heavier. And, in the marine world, they say, it's beside the point: Turtles eat plastic bags, not glass bottles and aluminum cans.

Todd Spitler, an Exxon spokesman, said the company's focus will be on "increasing plastic recyclability, supporting improvements in plastic waste recovery and minimizing plastic pellet loss from our operations."

The SESYNC study calls for setting global limits on the production of virgin plastic, a recommendation unlikely to be realized. At the last United Nations Environmental Program meeting in Nairobi, Kenya, in 2019, negotiations to pass a resolution calling for phasing out single-use plastic by 2025 and to draft a legally binding treaty on plastic debris ended in a stalemate.

The Pew/SYSTEMIQ study calls for reducing virgin production by 11 percent, arguing there is enough waste plastic that could be recycled and remade into new plastic to satisfy demand. The problem is that virgin plastic-new resin created from natural gas or oil-is so cheap to make that it undermines the economics of the recycling market. It is simply less expensive to manufacture new plastic than to collect, sort, and process disposable plastic into new feedstock. Especially now, with the collapse of oil prices. (Read more on the SYSTEMIQ study here.)

Plastic production to increase by 2050

In fact, production is forecast to more than double by 2050-increasing to 756 million tons anticipated in 2050 from 308 million tons produced in 2018, according to a report published by the American Chemistry Council in 2019. In the United States, $203 billion has been invested in 343 new or expanded chemical plants to produce plastics, according to ACC figures published last February. Production capacity for ethylene and propylene is projected to increase by 33 to 36 percent, according to an estimate by the Center for International Environmental Law.

Keith Christman, the ACC's managing director of plastics markets, says the demand for plastic products, such as lightweight automobile parts and materials used in home construction, including insulation and water piping, is only going to grow.

"New technologies is the direction that we see the industry going," he says.

Historically, plastic production has increased almost continuously since the 1950s, from 1.8 million tons in 1950 to 465 million tons in 2018. As of 2017, 7 billion of the 8.8 billion tons produced globally over that whole period have become waste.

The industry attributes future growth to two factors: the increasing global population and demands for more plastic consumer goods, fueled by the increasing buying power of a growing middle class. The UN projects that the world's population, now about 7.8 billion, will add about two billion more by 2050, primarily in Asia and Africa. Globally, the middle class is anticipated to expand by 400 million households by 2039-and that is where the plastics market growth will occur.

Africa, to cite one example, shows the complications that lie ahead for gaining control of plastic waste in the coming decades. The continent today generates waste at a low rate by global standards, according to a UN report published last year. It also has limited environmental regulations, weak enforcement, and inadequate systems in place to manage waste. But as its population explodes and becomes more urban, and as buying habits change with higher standards of living, sub-Saharan Africa is forecast to become the dominant region producing municipal waste.

"Everyone is going to need to play a role along the whole value chain," says Guy Bailey, a leading plastics analyst at Wood Mackenzie, a consulting firm specializing in energy, chemicals, mining and other research.

"If you are a recycler, it is difficult to make an investment when oil prices completely destroy the economics of your business. If you are a packing company, you are faced with so many choices of materials, it's hard to know which to pick. If you are a chemical company, you clearly can see the reputational challenge. They risk losing their social license to operate if things go too far. They want to address those challenges."

The Alliance to End Plastic Waste, founded last year by 50 industry titans, committed to investing $1.5 billion in creating solutions to improve methods for collecting plastic waste and recycling into new products. So far, it has launched 14 projects, many in Southeast Asia and Africa, including in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Ghana.

Jacob Duer, president and CEO, said the new report "reiterates the necessity and the urgency in addressing the issue and underlines the importance of a paradigm shift."

As the organization, based in Singapore, matures, he says the number of projects and capital investment will grow. But it opposes reducing virgin plastic production.

Both Duer and Martyn Ticknet, head of the Alliance's project development, see similarities between tackling plastic waste and global efforts to close the hole in the ozone layer that began in the 1970s. Last year the hole had shrunk to its smallest size on record since its discovery.

"We've solved major crises before," Ticknet says. "It takes some time to get going."

An earlier version of this story gave an incorrect name for the managing director of plastic markets at the American Chemistry Council. It is Keith Christman.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastic pollution is a huge problem-and it's not too late to fix it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The global campaign to gain control of plastic waste is one of the fastest-growing environmental causes ever mounted. Yet it hasn't been enough to make a dent in the growing tonnage of discarded plastic that ends up in the seas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Plastic waste is an equally big problem away from the high seas, filling up landfill sites, clogging rivers, and generating pollution through open burning or incineration. Some plastics also contain and leach out hazardous chemicals, posing further risks to wildlife and people.

Bad packaging design, a lack of infrastructure, and the absence of a means to track plastic waste all limit the effectiveness of recycling, and ensure that most plastic packaging will continue to become waste for the foreseeable future.

In the meantime, the companies that produce fast-moving consumer goods (FMCGs) are opening up new markets in the Global South, pushing more products packaged in single-use and single-portion plastics.
Join the global movement to reduce single-use plastic:
Tell the world's biggest plastic polluters to invest in reusable solutions Join the Plastic-Free Future Facebook group

Share:
Watch and share the Story of Plastic movie trailer Download and display a poster about plastic pollution

First-party cookies (required) Always enabled

These cookies are required for technical reasons so that you can visit our website and use the functions we offer. These cookies are used to recognise you between successive visits and thus provide you with a better experience, storing your consent preferences and the last Greenpeace.org website visited.

Performance cookies

We use tracking and analysis tools to ensure continuous optimisation and demand-oriented design of our website. These cookies will allow us to collect statistical and anonymised data, such as how visitors use our website or which pages are accessed most frequently, to ultimately improve Greenpeace.org and provide you with a better experience of our website.

Marketing cookies

In addition to the Performance cookies mentioned above, we may also place in your browser cookies from third-party services (e.g. Facebook or Google) to track the effectiveness of our online marketing strategies and to deliver adverts more relevant to you and your interests. These cookies may also be used to serve advertising to you after you have left our site (retargeting cookies).

Allow all Save preferences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learn About Plastic Pollution - Greenpeace International

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Plastic has found its way to the depths of our oceans, to remote forest paths, to the ice of the Arctic, and onto the island beaches where turtles nest.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Image Credit: sierraclub.org

Styrofoam, a plastic made of expandable polystyrene foam (EPS) is a useful invention. In fact one could call it almost too useful! The lightweight and buoyant plastic can be used for a myriad of things from thermal insulation to disposable plates & cups, packing material, and even to build boats! The only problem is that the versatile product is almost impossible to recycle.

While many cities have resorted to banning single-use EPS products, millions of tons of Styrofoam still ends up in landfills each year. This creates a series of challenges from water contamination to the poisoning of marine animals.

Now scientists may have found an unlikely natural solution to rid the world of this dangerous plastic - mealworms! Turns out that tiny larval forms of the darkling beetle, that are popular as 'pets' and even consumed as a snack by some, have a penchant for Styrofoam.

Photo Credit: Yu Yang via Stanford

This surprising revelation was made by a team of researchers from California's Stanford University and China's Beihang University. In the study that was published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology on September 30th, the scientists exposed 100 mealworms to Styrofoam. They observed that every 24 hours, each wriggly worm-like insect managed to eat its way through 34 - 39 milligrams (about the size of a pill) of the plastic.

What is even more exciting is that the worms were able to digest it as if they were eating their regular diet - Half was converted into carbon dioxide, and the other half became biodegradable waste that the researchers believe is safe to use as fertilizer! The scientists say the magical transformation can be attributed to certain microorganisms and bacteria present in the mealworm's gut.

Photo Credit: By Pengo (Own work) CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

Concerned about the worms? So were the scientists who conducted studies to ensure that the plastic-munching mealworms were just as healthy as their vegetable and grain eating counterparts. To ensure the environmental food chain will not be negatively impacted, the team also plans to perform similar studies on the small animals that consume the plastic-eating larvae.

Additionally, they will join forces with Stanford Professor Craig Criddle, to research if mealworms and other insects can help biodegrade additional hard-to-recycle human creations like polypropylene, that is used to manufacture automotive components and textiles. The scientists also hope to seek out the mealworm's aquatic equivalent to help rid of the millions of tons of plastic floating around in our oceans.

Photo Credit: Phys.org

This is not the first insect known to be able to digest plastic. Waxworms, which later evolve into Indian mealmoths, have the same talent when exposed to polyethylene, a plastic used in products such as trash bags. However, Wu considers this latest discovery, "One of the biggest breakthroughs in environmental science in the past 10 years." That's because Styrofoam has always been believed to be non-biodegradable and, therefore, considered very harmful to the environment.

So does this mean we will start to see armies of wriggling insects around plastic waste? Not really. What the scientists intend to do is conduct further studies to understand the conditions that are most conducive to plastic degradation and gain more insight into the enzymes that break down polymers. They will then use the information to artificially create even more powerful enzymes to help degrade the plastic.

Image Credit: trc.govt.nz

Wu believes his team may have found a solution to the world's plastic pollution problem. However it does not mean we have to stop practicing the three R's - Reuse, Recycle and most importantly Reduce!

Resources: cnn.com, stanford.edu.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Tiny Mealworms May Help Reduce Our Massive Plastic Pollution Problem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Styrofoam, a plastic made of expandable polystyrene foam (EPS) is a useful invention. In fact one could call it almost too useful! The lightweight and buoyant plastic can be used for a myriad of things from thermal insulation to disposable plates & cups, packing material, and even to build boats!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Henderson Island before the debris (Photo Credit: Unesco.org/ Ron Van Oers)

Henderson Island in the south Pacific Ocean has always been known for its remarkable biological diversity and untouched ecology. Now, the remote UNESCO World Heritage site that lies 3,100 miles (5,000 km) from the closest human settlement, can also lay claim to being one of the most polluted places on Earth.

Jennifer Lavers, a researcher from the University of Tasmania's Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies who has been studying the coral atoll for a few years, says the tiny, 14.4 square miles (37.3 square kilometers), island is home to over 38 million pieces of waste. According to the scientist, this is the "highest density of anthropogenic waste recorded anywhere in the world, with 99.8 percent of the pollution plastic."

Current state of Henderson Island (Photo Credit: Jennifer Lavers/University of Tasmania)

The amount of trash is surprising given that the island, the largest of the group of four Pitcairn volcanic islands, has no residents and is visited by scientists only once or twice every decade. However, as it turns out, humans do not need to be physically present to pollute an area. In this case, the trash is brought in by the South Pacific Gyre, an ocean current that sends garbage bobbing through the sea to Henderson. The primary offenders are fishing-related debris, like lines and nets, and single-use household items.

What's even worse is that the unsightly rubbish scattered across the island's sandy beaches is just the tip of the iceberg. According to the researchers, over 68% of the junk is buried under the sand. This means their estimates, based on the trash found up to 10 centimeters below the sand, may be underestimating the full extent of the pollution.

Hermit crab uses cosmetic jar for shelter (Photo Credit: Jennifer Lavers/University of Tasmania)

Besides being aesthetically unpleasing, the waste is also harmful to the island's wildlife. Lavers and study co-author Alexander Bond discovered hermit crabs taking refuge in toxic cosmetic jars, and sea turtles, that come to the island to lay eggs, entangled inside fishing lines. The trash is also harmful to seabirds and fish that mistake the colorful plastic pieces for food.

An analysis of a 32-foot patch of the beach revealed that much of the trash originated from China, Japan, and Chile. However, Lavers and Bond, who published their findings in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, on April 7, state, "Across the board, no country got a free pass on this - we found bottles from Germany, containers from Canada, I think it was a fishing crate from New Zealand. What that says is we all have a responsibility in this, and we have to sit up and pay attention to that."

Photo Credit: Jennifer Lavers/University of Tasmania

Unfortunately, Henderson's debris collection which equals just 1.98 seconds of the world's annual production of plastic, is a mere blip in the amount of the nondegradable material that is carelessly tossed out every day. According to experts, over 8 million tons of plastic waste ends up in our landfills and oceans each year.

Environmentalists like Boyan Slat, who founded The Ocean Cleanup in 2011 after discovering "more bags than fish" while diving in Greece, are trying to clean up the mess. However, his efforts will only make a difference if we all pitch in by avoiding plastic altogether or reusing and recycling when that is not possible. Unless we find ways to reverse the situation, this ever increasing pollution poses a serious risk to the health of our planet and all its residents, including humans.

Resources: Guardian.co.uk, NPR.org, treehugger.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Once Pristine Henderson Island Is Now Covered With Plastic Waste

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Henderson Island in the south Pacific Ocean has always been known for its remarkable biological diversity and untouched ecology. Now, the remote UNESCO World Heritage site that lies 3,100 miles (5,000 km) from the closest human settlement, can also lay claim to being one of the most polluted places on Earth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bosco Verticale buildings in Milan (Photo Credit Stefano Boeri)

Ever since Malaysian ecologist-architect Ken Yeang introduced the concept in the 1990's, living walls and rooftops have become an increasingly common sight in both residential and commercial buildings. In addition to looking good, planted exteriors also help cut energy costs, and, in the case of rooftop farms, provide urban dwellers with homegrown produce. Now, Stefano Boeri wants to take green architecture to the next level with "Forest Cities" to combat China's air pollution woes.

The Italian architect's foray into metropolitan reforestation began in 2014 with two towers in central Milan. Measuring 110-meters (360-feet) and 76-meters (249-feet) in height, they host 900 trees measuring between 3 to 9 meters each and over 20,000 shrubs and plants pre-cultivated specifically for the purpose. The foliage is irrigated by rain as well as the building's gray water recycling system. The "Bosco Verticales," or "Vertical Forests," that are equivalent to a flat area of about 2 acres, provide year-round energy savings and improve the air quality by releasing moisture and converting carbon dioxide into oxygen. The vegetal system also acts as a windscreen, captures dust particles from the air, and blocks noise from the bustling Milan streets, making for a much healthier living environment for the residents.

Forest Mountain Hotel in Guizhou (Photo Credit Stefano Boeri

Boeri's first project in China is the Forest Mountain Hotel in Guizhou that is scheduled to open this fall. According to the architect, the 31,200 square-meter (231,424 square-feet) structure's design is inspired by the site's original topography and ecosystem, which is also known as the Forest of Ten Thousands Peaks. Also in the works are two skyscrapers in the city of Nanjing. Similar to those in Milan, the 200-meter (656-feet) tall office building and 108-meter (354-feet) tall hotel will boast 23 species of trees and over 2,500 shrubs and plants. Boeri estimates they will absorb 25 tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere annually and produce as much as 60 kg of oxygen every day.

Of course, the three buildings, are not enough to solve China's smog problem, which is why Boeri is now attempting to create "Forested Cities." His architectural design team is currently devising plans for a wooded settlement in Liuzhou, a medium-sized city that is home to about 1.5 million residents. All the buildings will have gray water recycling systems and be powered by solar or wind energy. The architect is also hoping to build a green mini-city around Shijiazhuang, an industrial area in northern China that is infamous for consistently being one of the country's ten most polluted cities.

Roosgaarde's smog cleaning machine (Photo Credit: Daan Roosegaarde)

Boeri is not the only one devising ways to clean up China's polluted air. In September 2016, Dutch designer Daan Roosegaarde took his massive smog cleaning machine on a five-city tour that began in Beijing. The seven-meter tall tower, believed to be the "world's largest smog-cleaning machine," filters 30,000 cubic meters of air each hour - removing even the finest smog particles and releasing fresh, clean air using about the same amount of electricity as a water boiler. The best part is, the captured carbon particles are compressed and transformed into expensive jewelry that is sold to generate funds for the project. With innovations like these, the country's air pollution struggles may soon be a thing of the past.

Resources: inhabitat.com,dezeen.com,mashable.com, stefanoboeriarchitetti.net

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Italian Architect Envisions "Forest Cities" To Combat China's Air Pollution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ever since Malaysian ecologist-architect Ken Yeang introduced the concept in the 1990's, living walls and rooftops have become an increasingly common sight in both residential and commercial buildings. In addition to looking good, planted exteriors also help cut energy costs, and in the case of rooftop farms provide urban dwellers with homegrown produce.

# data[].attributes.headline
Cleaning Up the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

# data[].attributes.subject
Cleaning Up the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Boyan Slat's non-profit Ocean Cleanup was able to successfully collect floating debris from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch (Credit: theoceancleanup.com)

Boyan Slat has been dreaming of cleaning up the world's oceans ever since he was a teenager. On October 2, 2019, the now 25-year-old announced that System 001/B, an autonomous retrieval system developed by his non-profit Ocean Cleanup, had successfully trapped plastic debris floating in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. Located between Hawaii and California, the approximately 617,763 square-mile mass of waste is the largest accumulation of ocean plastic in the world.

"After beginning this journey seven years ago, this first year of testing in the unforgivable environment of the high seas strongly indicates that our vision is attainable and that the beginning of our mission to rid the ocean of plastic garbage, which has accumulated for decades, is within our sights," said Slat.

25-year-old Boyan Slat is leading the effort to clean our oceans (Credit: theoceancleanup.com)

Slat first became aware of ocean pollution during a diving vacation in Greece in 2010, when he observed more plastic on the beaches than fish in the sea. In 2013, the Dutch teenager, who had always dreamed of becoming an aerospace engineer, decided to forgo higher education and instead establish The Ocean Cleanup. The foundation's mission was to create an environmentally-friendly, large-scale solution to remove the ever-increasing plastic debris from aquatic ecosystems.

Though the idea sounded feasible, creating an autonomous, scalable device, which did not harm marine creatures, was no easy task. It took five years, 273 models, and six prototypes before Slat's team of 70 scientists and engineers launched the U-shaped, solar-powered System 001, or "Wilson," off the coast of San Francisco in October 2018.

System 001 comprised a long floater that sat on the surface of the water and a skirt that hung beneath it. The floater provided buoyancy, while the skirt prevented debris from escaping underneath and channeled it into the retention system. A cork line above the skirt stopped overtopping and kept the skirt afloat. However, though the solar-powered "Wilson" easily scooped up the garbage, it was unable to retain it, primarily due to the difference between the speed of the system and and the plastic debris.

It took the Ocean Cleanup team six years to develop a a working prototype to help remove plastic debris from the Pacific (Credit: theoceancleanup.com)

Undeterred by the minor setback, Slat's team spent the next year testing a new prototype with a parachute sea anchor that allowed for faster-moving plastic debris to float into the system. Though this solved the issue of the speed differential between the water and debris, it caused a large amount of the plastic to rise above the barrier and escape. This was fixed by increasing the size of the cork line. System 001/B, launched off the coast of Vancouver, Canada, in June 2019, successfully completed its inaugural mission collecting a vast amount of ocean garbage that ranged from large fishing nets to barely discernible micro-plastics.

"We now have a self-contained system in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch that is using the natural forces of the ocean to passively catch and concentrate plastics ... This now gives us sufficient confidence in the general concept to keep going on this project," Slat said.

Slat hopes to clean up 50 percent of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch by 2024 (Credit: theoceancleanup.com)

The social entrepreneur and his team plan to continue improving the device and building additional units so they can be deployed to oceans worldwide. They hope to make it more durable, so it can retain plastic for up to a year or even longer before collection is necessary. Slat's dream is to remove 50 percent of the trash in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch within the next five years, and 90 percent of all ocean plastic by 2040! The reclaimed polymer will be brought back to shore and transformed into premium products.

"I think in a few years' time when we have the full-scale fleet out there, I think it should be possible to cover the operational cost of the cleanup operation using the plastic harvested," Slat said.

Resources: theoceancleanup.com. Newatlas.com, theguardian.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Boyan Slat's Ocean Cleanup Project Successfully Retrieves Plastic From The Great Pacific Garbage Patch

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Boyan Slat has been dreaming of cleaning up the world's oceans ever since he was a teenager. On October 2, 2019, the now 25-year-old announced that System 001/B, an autonomous retrieval system developed by his non-profit Ocean Cleanup, had successfully trapped plastic debris floating in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

# data[].attributes.headline
Plastic-Eating Enzymes Could Save Our Planet?

# data[].attributes.subject
Plastic-Eating Enzymes Could Save Our Planet?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Only a portion of the over 359 million tons of plastic that is produced annually gets recycled (Credit: Hans/CCO/Pixabay)

The negative health impacts of plastic on both wildlife and humans have been well-documented. However, the versatile material, which is used for everything from grocery bags to drink bottles to food packaging, is hard to avoid. Experts estimate that of the 359 million tons of plastics produced annually worldwide, about 150-200 million tons end up in landfills or the environment. To make matters worse, the material derived from the small percentage of plastic that is recycled is of lower quality and can only be used a few times for items like clothing or carpets before it has to be discarded.

Now, French start-up Carbios wants to help alleviate the world's plastic pollution problem with a mutant bacterial enzyme that digests PET - the most abundant polyester plastic used to produce packaging, textile fibers, and plastic bottles - and turn it into its chemical building blocks. The resulting material can be used to create anything and, more importantly, can be continuously recycled.

Carbios has developed an enzyme that breaks down plastic into its original chemical building blocks (Credit: Carbios)

Mechanical recycling, which entails washing, shredding, and melting the polymer, "is limited," explains Carbios CEO Martin Stephan. "To make a transparent bottle with that technology, you need a transparent bottle as a feedstock. And you cannot do that infinitely. After six or seven cycles of recycling, the plastic might only be good enough to use for something like the plastic on the backing of a carpet, and eventually, it will have to be thrown away entirely. So it's not a solution for the end of life of plastics, whereas our solution is an infinite recycling solution."

The company's quest for the optimal plastic-eating bacteria began about a decade ago, with 100,000 promising candidates. The list was soon whittled down to one - a leaf compost bug, which was first discovered in 2012. "It had been completely forgotten, but it turned out to be the best," said Alain Marty, a professor at the Univerité de Toulouse and the chief science officer at Carbios.

The recycled material produced by Carbios is of high quality and can be reused forever (Credit: Carbios)

Once the perfect contender had been identified, Carbios scientists introduced mutations to improve its plastic digesting prowess and keep it stable at 65 degrees Celsius - the ideal temperature for fast degradation. The new and improved enzyme was able to downgrade 90 percent of a metric ton of shredded plastic in less than 10 hours.

To breakdown the plastic, the waste is placed in a reactor with water and the enzyme and heated for 16 hours at 65 degrees Celsius. The resulting mix is then filtered and purified. This allows for the recovery of the building blocks that make up PET plastics - PTA (Purified Terephthalic Acid) and MEG (Mono Ethylene Glycol) - and also extracts any additives and colors that may be present. "These [PTA and MEG] are then repolymerized into virgin PET and transformed into a bottle, without the need of having to use new monomers [molecules] made from fossil resources," says Benjamin Audebert, the company's head of investor relations.

Carbios manufactures new food-grade plastic bottles created using recycled material (Credit: Carbios)

The recycling process, which is currently in its pilot stage, will be tested on a larger scale at a new, bigger facility in Lyon, France, by the end of 2020 or early 2021. Once all the kinks have been removed, Carbios hopes to launch the technology commercially. Not surprisingly, the company has already signed up several large customers, including L'Oréal, Nestlé Waters, PepsiCo, and Suntory Beverage & Food Europe, who are all eager to reduce their ecological footprint. "We are the first company to bring this technology on the market," said Stephan. "Our goal is to be up and running by 2024, 2025, at large industrial scale."

Though Carbios's recycling technique will certainly help reduce plastic pollution, Stephan believes it is only part of the solution. The CEO thinks we can only win the battle if people do a better job of ensuring that plastic waste does not end up in the environment or in landfills. So the next time you use a plastic bottle or container, be sure to make the extra effort to place it in a recycling bin.

Resources: Forbes.com, Fastcompany.com, Time.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Carbios's Plastic-Eating Enzyme May Help Alleviate The World's Pollution Problem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The negative health impacts of plastic on both wildlife and humans have been well-documented. However, the versatile material, which is used for everything from grocery bags to drink bottles to food packaging, is hard to avoid. Experts estimate that of the 359 million tons of plastics produced annually worldwide, about 150-200 million tons end up in landfills or the environment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A: Since the Industrial Revolution, the global annual temperature has increased in total by a little more than 1 degree Celsius, or about 2 degrees Fahrenheit. Between 1880-the year that accurate recordkeeping began-and 1980, it rose on average by 0.07 degrees Celsius (0.13 degrees Fahrenheit) every 10 years. Since 1981, however, the rate of increase has more than doubled: For the last 40 years, we've seen the global annual temperature rise by 0.18 degrees Celsius, or 0.32 degrees Fahrenheit, per decade.

The result? A planet that has never been hotter. Nine of the 10 warmest years since 1880 have occurred since 2005-and the 5 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2015. Climate change deniers have argued that there has been a "pause" or a "slowdown" in rising global temperatures, but numerous studies, including a 2018 paper published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, have disproved this claim. The impacts of global warming are already harming people around the world.

What causes global warming?

A: Global warming occurs when carbon dioxide (CO ₂) and other air pollutants collect in the atmosphere and absorb sunlight and solar radiation that have bounced off the earth's surface. Normally this radiation would escape into space, but these pollutants, which can last for years to centuries in the atmosphere, trap the heat and cause the planet to get hotter. These heat-trapping pollutants-specifically carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, water vapor, and synthetic fluorinated gases-are known as greenhouse gases, and their impact is called the greenhouse effect.

How is global warming linked to extreme weather?

A: Scientists agree that the earth's rising temperatures are fueling longer and hotter heat waves, more frequent droughts, heavier rainfall, and more powerful hurricanes.

In 2015, for example, scientists concluded that a lengthy drought in California-the state's worst water shortage in 1,200 years-had been intensified by 15 to 20 percent by global warming. They also said the odds of similar droughts happening in the future had roughly doubled over the past century. And in 2016, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine announced that we can now confidently attribute some extreme weather events, like heat waves, droughts, and heavy precipitation, directly to climate change.

The impacts of global warming are being felt everywhere. Extreme heat waves have caused tens of thousands of deaths around the world in recent years. And in an alarming sign of events to come, Antarctica has lost nearly four trillion metric tons of ice since the 1990s. The rate of loss could speed up if we keep burning fossil fuels at our current pace, some experts say, causing sea levels to rise several meters in the next 50 to 150 years and wreaking havoc on coastal communities worldwide.

What are the other effects of global warming?

A: Each year scientists learn more about the consequences of global warming, and each year we also gain new evidence of its devastating impact on people and the planet. As the heat waves, droughts, and floods associated with climate change become more frequent and more intense, communities suffer and death tolls rise. If we're unable to reduce our emissions, scientists believe that climate change could lead to the deaths of more than 250,000 people around the globe every year and force 100 million people into poverty by 2030.

Global warming is already taking a toll on the United States. And if we aren't able to get a handle on our emissions, here's just a smattering of what we can look forward to:

Disappearing glaciers, early snowmelt, and severe droughts will cause more dramatic water shortages and continue to increase the risk of wildfires in the American West.

Rising sea levels will lead to even more coastal flooding on the Eastern Seaboard, especially in Florida, and in other areas such as the Gulf of Mexico.

Forests, farms, and cities will face troublesome new pests, heat waves, heavy downpours, and increased flooding. All of these can damage or destroy agriculture and fisheries.

Disruption of habitats such as coral reefs and alpine meadows could drive many plant and animal species to extinction.

Allergies, asthma, and infectious disease outbreaks will become more common due to increased growth of pollen-producing ragweed, higher levels of air pollution, and the spread of conditions favorable to pathogens and mosquitoes.

Though everyone is affected by climate change, not everyone is affected equally. Indigenous people, people of color, and the economically marginalized are typically hit the hardest. Inequities built into our housing, health care, and labor systems make these communities more vulnerable to the worst impacts of climate change-even though these same communities have done the least to contribute to it.

Where does the United States stand in terms of global-warming contributors?

A: In recent years, China has taken the lead in global-warming pollution, producing about 26 percent of all CO2 emissions. The United States comes in second. Despite making up just 4 percent of the world's population, our nation produces a sobering 13 percent of all global CO2 emissions-nearly as much as the European Union and India (third and fourth place) combined. And America is still number one, by far, in cumulative emissions over the past 150 years. As a top contributor to global warming, the United States has an obligation to help propel the world to a cleaner, safer, and more equitable future. Our responsibility matters to other countries, and it should matter to us, too.

Is the United States doing anything to prevent global warming?

A: We've started. But in order to avoid the worsening effects of climate change, we need to do a lot more-together with other countries-to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and transition to clean energy sources.

Despite the lack of cooperation from the Trump administration, local and state governments made great strides during this period through efforts like the American Cities Climate Challenge and ongoing collaborations like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Meanwhile, industry and business leaders have been working with the public sector, creating and adopting new clean-energy technologies and increasing energy efficiency in buildings, appliances, and industrial processes. Today the American automotive industry is finding new ways to produce cars and trucks that are more fuel efficient and is committing itself to putting more and more zero-emission electric vehicles on the road. Developers, cities, and community advocates are coming together to make sure that new affordable housing is built with efficiency in mind, reducing energy consumption and lowering electric and heating bills for residents. And renewable energy continues to surge as the costs associated with its production and distribution keep falling. In 2020 renewable energy sources such as wind and solar provided more electricity than coal for the very first time in U.S. history.

Is global warming too big a problem for me to help tackle?

A: No! While we can't win the fight without large-scale government action at the national level, we also can't do it without the help of individuals who are willing to use their voices, hold government and industry leaders to account, and make changes in their daily habits.

Wondering how you can be a part of the fight against global warming? Reduce your own carbon footprint by taking a few easy steps: Make conserving energy a part of your daily routine and your decisions as a consumer. When you shop for new appliances like refrigerators, washers, and dryers, look for products with the government's ENERGY STAR ® label; they meet a higher standard for energy efficiency than the minimum federal requirements. When you buy a car, look for one with the highest gas mileage and lowest emissions. You can also reduce your emissions by taking public transportation or carpooling when possible.

And while new federal and state standards are a step in the right direction, much more needs to be done. Voice your support of climate-friendly and climate change preparedness policies, and tell your representatives that equitably transitioning from dirty fossil fuels to clean power should be a top priority-because it's vital to building healthy, more secure communities.

You don't have to go it alone, either. Movements across the country are showing how climate action can build community, be led by those on the front lines of its impacts, and create a future that's equitable and just for all.

This story was originally published on March 11, 2016 and has been updated with new information and links.

This NRDC.org story is available for online republication by news media outlets or nonprofits under these conditions: The writer(s) must be credited with a byline; you must note prominently that the story was originally published by NRDC.org and link to the original; the story cannot be edited (beyond simple things such as grammar); you can't resell the story in any form or grant republishing rights to other outlets; you can't republish our material wholesale or automatically-you need to select stories individually; you can't republish the photos or graphics on our site without specific permission; you should to let us know when you've used one of our stories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is global warming? Global warming causes, effects, extreme weather, facts, and relation to climate change.

# data[].attributes.headline
United States Environmental Protection Agency Website

# data[].attributes.subject
United States Environmental Protection Agency Website

# data[].attributes.headline
Types of Air Pollution in MN based on demographics

# data[].attributes.subject
Types of Air Pollution in MN based on demographics

# data[].attributes.headline
Air Pollution in MN based on demographics

# data[].attributes.subject
Air Pollution in MN based on demographics

# data[].attributes.body
This website shares various ways Minnesota is tackling environmental issues in Minnesota

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about the threats that our Minnesota lakes are facing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. Water

2. How's the water?

3. The state of water

4. The state of lakes

Many lakes in Minnesota have elevated levels of phosphorus caused by contaminated runoff, erosion, and sediment. Some lakes are also polluted with chloride, which comes from road salt and water softeners.

Contaminated runoff, erosion, and sediment

Runoff from agricultural land and lakeshore development raises the amount of phosphorus in Minnesota lakes, which in turn causes algae to grow. Algae-covered lakes are less attractive for fishing and swimming - highly valued pastimes in Minnesota and uses that are protected under the federal Clean Water Act. In addition, phosphorus can fuel toxic blue-green algal blooms, which are harmful to people and pets.

In 2013, intense algal blooms on southern Minnesota's Lake Crystal resulted in Minneopa Creek's waterfall at Minneopa State Park flowing green.

Too much salt

The salt applied to roads, parking lots, and sidewalks during our icy winters contains chloride, a water pollutant. When snow and ice melts, the salt goes with it, washing into our lakes. It takes only one teaspoon of road salt to permanently pollute five gallons of water. Lakes that receive municipal wastewater can also have elevated chloride levels from water softener salt. Once in the water, there is no way to remove the chloride, and at high concentrations, chloride can harm fish and plant life. The issue is particularly acute in the metro areas, where there is more pavement and therefore more winter salting.

Invasive species

Invasive species, such as zebra mussels, Eurasian watermilfoil, and Asian carp, are not native to Minnesota and can cause economic or environmental damage or harm human health. Invasive species have taken hold in many Minnesota lakes. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is working to curb the spread of these plants and animals. Learn more on the DNR website.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Water How's the water? The state of water The state of lakes Many lakes in Minnesota have elevated levels of phosphorus caused by contaminated runoff, erosion, and sediment. Some lakes are also polluted with chloride, which comes from road salt and water softeners.