Industry
phasing out microplastics, but PA lawmakers want a ban anyhow
Send a link to a friend
[July 17, 2015]
By Rachel Martin | Watchdog.org
PITTSBURGH — Trade groups and
manufacturers are already voluntarily phasing out the production and
use of microbeads, tiny plastic bits that add grit to products like
facial cleaners and colorful decoration to toothpastes.
|
But that hasn’t stopped Pennsylvania lawmakers from rushing to join the growing
list of states banning the use of microbeads. The U.S. House and Senate are also
considering bans.
Map courtesy of Alliance for the Great Lakes
Map courtesy of Alliance for the Great Lakes
SPREADING REGULATION: According to the Alliance for the Great Lakes, eight
states have now passed bans on microplastics, and more than a dozen are actively
considering bans.
“Plastics provide many important benefits to modern life, but they don’t belong
in lakes, oceans or other waterways,” the American Chemistry Council said in a
March statement.
Microbeads are too small to be trapped by most sewage treatment facilities and
end up in waterways. Because they’re plastic, they stick around.
“The problem isn’t just the plastics, but the fact that the plastic acts like a
chemical sponge,” Dr. Sherri Mason, a professor of chemistry at SUNY Fredonia,
told Watchdog.org. She conducted some of the first research on microplastics in
the Great Lakes in 2012.
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2015/Jul/17/images/ads/current/pestcontrol_bch_fleas_061215.png)
Mason said the microplastics absorb toxins that can leach into fish that eat
them.
Worldwide, 60 trade groups in 34 countries have signed on a Declaration for
Solutions on Marine Litter. Support for Illinois’ ban and similar legislation is
touted in that group’s 2014 progress report.
Photo by 5 Gyres Institute
Photo by 5 Gyres Institute
MARINE MESS: Debris from the sampling Dr. Sherri Mason did in 2012 at Lake Erie.
These spherical beads are “chemical sponges,” Mason says.
Johnson & Johnson and Procter & Gamble have begun their phaseouts. Unilever says
it finished the job in January.
So with business speeding ahead of legislators, what’s in it for Pennsylvania
lawmakers?
“I commend the industry for being willing to address this issue in advance of a
legislatively enacted ban, but I still feel it necessary for the ban to be
instituted for ongoing assurance,” Sean Wiley told Watchdog.
[to top of second column] |
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2015/Jul/17/images/ads/current/mks_lda_061615.png) The Erie Democrat is one of the sponsors of a possible Pennsylvania bill that
would prohibit personal-care products that contain the controversial plastic.
He’s joined by two Republicans, Richard Alloway (R-Franklin) and Gene Yaw
(R-Bradford).
Laura Guncheon, a spokeswoman for Wiley, said she wasn’t sure when the bill
would be introduced. They are still ironing out the language.
“It’s noteworthy that the political process is always behind the market,” Antony
Davies, an associate professor of economics at Duquesne University, told
Watchdog. “The politicians are coming after the horse has already come back, and
they’re going to lock the door.
“It’s possible, as well, that it’s a matter of making political hay: Because no
one’s against it, (politicians) can paint it as a bogeyman that they’re going to
save you from.”
Davies says it’s doubtful the state and federal regulations are necessary.
“We tend to think that we have to rely on government for protection, when in
fact companies are very careful not to do things that annoy customers,” Davies
said. “Companies can be punished far more severely at the cash register than
they can be at the ballot box.”
Click here to respond to the editor about this article
![](http://archives.lincolndailynews.com/2015/Jul/17/images/ads/current/st_claras_lda_082114.png)
|