LITTER HURTS CRITTERS

World Animal Foundation www.worldanimalfoundation.org/articles/article/8949679/186245.htm

Humans dispose of trillions of tons of garbage every year. The average person in a developed country produces

about 2.6 pounds of garbage every single day.

Landfills take in most of this garbage, while a substantial amount of litter finds its way into the natural

environment. Tens of thousands of cans and bottles are thrown out of moving vehicles everyday. An enormous

amounts of waste is left behind on beaches, parks and river banks. One clean-up drive alone along a US coastline

collected over 3.5 million tons of garbage. A two-mile highway stretch of West Virginia yielded over 30,000 items

of litter.

Imagine if that litter was being tossed into your home. For wildlife, this is the disturbing and dangerous reality of

litter.

What is litter to us, unwittingly becomes food for hungry animals. This litter may seem useful to animals, but it is

often harmful or deadly. Discarded foods are prone to quick contamination and the microorganisms that cause

food poisoning can be fatal to animals.

Broken glass can cut the feet of wild animals, and unbroken bottles can be a death trap. Hungry animals in search

of food remains at the bottom of a jar or can often get their heads stuck, causing fatal suffocation. Even the

tiniest of creatures can be lured by something like a beer or soda can. The sharp edges of a discarded can can be

a threat to such delicate creatures seeking shelter or a taste of what remains inside.

Highways have become deathbeds for many unwary animals foraging for food. Litter tossed out of car windows

onto freeways attracts inquisitive deer, coyotes, raccoons and skunks. Foxes forage for garbage on our streets at

night, followed by pigeons during the day feasting on the night's leftovers. In addition to the hazards posed by

litter, these animals often suffer serious injuries or death from vehicle collisions.

Aquatic animals are among the worst affected by human litter. Trash tossed carelessly outside washes into storm

drains and creeks, which empty into rivers that eventually flow to the oceans. Trash adversely affects the habitat

of marine and other aquatic environments causing death and injury to seabirds, fish, marine mammals, turtles

and countless other species through swallowing and entanglement. Fishing hooks are often ingested by pelicans,

turtles, seabirds and other aquatic creatures. Often, larger items like nets, fishing line, and abandoned crab pots

snare or trap animals. Entanglement can lead to injury, illness, suffocation, starvation, and death. Seabirds suffer

lead poisoning from ingesting small lead fishing weights. Seabirds have also moved inland to garbage dumps

where they ingest a variety of rubbish.

Plastic bags on the seafloor take 10 to 20 years to decompose. Plastic bottles take much longer. As a result, one

piece can kill more than one animal. An animal killed by ingesting plastic will decompose long before the plastic,

allowing the plastic to kill again.

Litter along our coastlines, much of it plastic, is often digested by seabirds, turtles and whales. Seagulls act as

scavengers and consume litter from food leftovers on beaches. Serious consequences for these creatures include

stomach and bowel damage, strangulation and death. Many more animals are ensnared by plastic six-pack

holders.

Cigarette butt waste is not only unsightly, but when ingested may be hazardous to the health of animals.

Cigarette butts are commonly discarded onto beaches, sidewalks, streets, parks and many other public places

where domestic animals and wildlife may be exposed to risk of ingestion. When carelessly discarded, they are

carried from storm sewers and beaches to streams, lakes and oceans. Sea creatures, birds and companion

animals are indiscriminate eaters. Ingested cigarette butts can choke an animal or poison it with toxins. Animals

may not be able to regurgitate such items, with some acquiring gastrointestinal bezoars that can lead to a false

sense of satiation and subsequent under-nutrition.

Balloons are great at birthdays, weddings, graduations and more, but once they get loose, balloons can pose a

threat to many animals. Birds, turtles and other wildlife commonly mistake balloons for food, which can harm or

kill them. In addition, many animals become entangled in balloon strings, which can injury or even strangle them.

Attitudes towards litter management seem to be shifting towards the positive, albeit slowly. Landfills, the biggest

receivers of garbage, have made some progress concerning the protection of wildlife. Improving package design

and construction can reduce needless waste and render them less harmful to animals. But real change has to

come from individuals. Recycling techniques adopted domestically can reduce outflow of litter from homes

dramatically. Education on basic rudiments of garbage management and disposal at the domestic level can

indeed go a long way in mitigating the threat to animals foraging for litter.

At the root of this growing hunger for trash lies the shrinking natural habitat of animals affected by unwarranted

development. In the human quest for faster progress, the environment is the biggest casualty and animals are

the victims. It is our responsibility to save animals from the hazards we have created. With the mountain of

garbage being added daily to the earth's surface and seas by our teeming billions, a huge challenge faces us into

the future.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Fighting the litter problem begins at home.

- Cut back on the amount of trash you produce.

- Opt for reusable items instead of single-use products.

- Recycle as much of your trash as you can.

- Join local efforts to pick up trash.

- Keep streets, sidewalks, parking lots, and storm drains free of trash.

- Don’t litter. Common litter includes plastic bags, paper, candy wrappers, fast-food packaging, bottle caps, glass

bottles, plastic six-pack rings and plastic straws.

- Spend one hour picking up litter. Organize a team of family, friends, or co-workers to pick up litter in your local

neighborhood, wildlife refuge or park. Enjoy making a difference, getting exercise, getting to know people better

and having cleaner surroundings.

- Don't host balloon releases. Encourage others to substitute balloons for other, more ecologically responsible,

party favors.

5 Ways Plastic Pollution Impacts Animals on Land

By Malorie Macklin at onegreenplanet.org

http://www.onegreenplanet.org/environment/ways-plastic-pollution-impacts-animals-on-land/

Much is made of plastic’s impact on our marine environments. And rightly so given the massive

destruction that plastics can wreak on our oceans. With 80 percent of marine garbage being land-based,

90 percent of that is estimated to be plastic. Unlike other materials, plastic never truly decomposes, it

simply breaks into smaller bits that will remain in the oceans forever as a sort of microscopic plastic

soup. And that plastic soup the ocean is becoming has had a prominent effect on marine wildlife. But

what of the plastic waste that never reaches the ocean and is instead confined to land? Are plastics a

danger to terrestrial animals too?

The answer is a resounding “yes!” Plastic waste that never makes its way to the ocean still ends up being

very dangerous to both wild animals and domesticated ones. And the impacts felt by these animals

closely mirrors their marine brethren. They can suffer from various forms of entanglements as well as

accidental consumption which may be deadly. This can be a heartbreaking topic, but it’s important to

address for the sake of animals everywhere.

1. Plastics Can Cause a Headache….

You may have seen viral videos of an animal like a dog or raccoon walking around with a peanut butter

jar or the like stuck on its head. While some may find this comical, the end result for many animals is

actually no laughing matter. Food containers were generally made for knives or spoons to be dipped

into them, or to have their contents poured out. They certainly weren’t made for serving up tasty

morsels to hungry animals. An animal with its head stuck in a plastic food container may suffer from

overheating, suffocation, dehydration, starvation, and eventual death from these elements. It is also not

equipped to defend itself from a threat.

2. …And a Bellyache, for That Matter

Christina Welsh/Flickr

Plastics don’t belong in a lot of places and a belly is one of them! Animals may mistake plastic for food,

or they may consume plastic in the process of eating the leftover food it contains. Either way, it does no

good for a tummy that belongs to a dog, a crow, or a cow. Plastic stands to cause intestinal blockages in

an animal that consumes it. Death is the ultimate tragedy for animals that consume plastic and this is a

sad fate that both wild and domestic animals alike can face.

3. Plastic Paws

Have you tried walking around with plastic wrapped around your legs or a food container stuck on your

feet? It probably isn’t very easy. In an addition to being flat-out uncomfortable, it can also be dangerous.

An animal that can’t walk also can’t get away from predators or an oncoming car. It will also have a

difficult time getting to food or water sources. Plastic can also cause terrible wounds to an animal, even

resulting in loss of limbs. The Humane Society of the United States says that for them, raccoons stuck in

plastic ring beverage holders is a common injury with the animals slicing up their bodies on the plastic.

Ouch!

4. Plastics Don’t Fly With Birds

MrTinDC/Flickr

Similar to plastics hurting animals that walk, birds also stand to be impacted by plastic when it impedes

their ability to fly. For example, if they end up with plastic soda rings around their body or a plastic bag

gets wrapped around their wings it can be a serious problem. Staying close to their flock, getting up into

a tree or nest for safety, or migrating isn’t possible without wings! Additionally, birds may even

endanger their young accidentally by using plastic nesting materials that stand to hurt the next

generation.

5. Oh, Deer!

This last one is a tragic tale shared by a professor at Mississippi State University. A friend of his spotted a

buck with a full set of antlers on a trail camera. Wrapped around the buck’s antlers was a piece of plastic

twine used for bailing hay. Two weeks after the trail camera sighting, the man found the same buck,

dead and entangled with another dead buck’s antlers with the plastic twine. Bucks often spar with each

other using their antlers, but this tussle became deadly when the plastic litter prevented the two from

separating. They most likely suffered immensely before succumbing to the tiny piece of plastic litter.

Tell Plastic To Peace Out!

Knowing the impact that plastic can have on the animals around you, surely you want to do all you can

to keep them safe from this nasty villain.

The first step to take would be to reduce the amount of plastics you use. If you have a choice at the

grocery store, aim for foods that come in larger single packages rather than individual ones. And try to

avoid produce wrapped in plastic bags or packaged in plastic trays.

Second, eliminate your single-use plastics and opt for reusable products in their place. You can cut

plastic beverage containers from your life by using cups, mugs, reusable water bottles, or even a mason

jar to tote your water, juice and tea around with you. Don’t forget your stylish reusable bags when you

go to the grocery store! And you can also replace any plastic eating utensils plates and cups with

reusable ones – your monthly grocery bill will benefit too!

Finally, for the plastic you can’t eliminate from your life, try to be mindful of how you dispose of it to

reduce the chances it may endanger an animal later on down the line. Cut those plastic drink holders so

the rings won’t entangle an animal. To help eliminate some of the temptation, rinse containers out as

best as possible. And try to make sure your garbage and recycling bins aren’t easily accessible to either

your pets or the local squirrels – keep a sturdy lid in place and a lock if need be.

Adapted from the Center for Biological Diversity in California, for full text see: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/ocean_plastics/

OCEAN PLASTICS POLLUTION:

A Global Tragedy for Our Oceans and Sea Life

Plastic never goes away. And it’s increasingly finding its way into our oceans and onto our beaches. In the Los Angeles area alone,

10 metric tons of plastic fragments — like grocery bags, straws and soda bottles — are carried into the Pacific Ocean every day.

Today billions of pounds of plastic can be found in swirling convergences making up about 40 percent of the world’s ocean

surfaces.

Plastics pollution has a direct and deadly effect on wildlife. Thousands of seabirds and sea turtles, seals and other marine

mammals are killed each year after ingesting plastic or getting entangled in it. Endangered wildlife like Hawaiian monk seals and

Pacific loggerhead sea turtles are among nearly 300 species that eat and get caught in plastic litter.

THE PLASTIC PROBLEM

We're surrounded by plastic. Think about every piece you touch in a single day: grocery bags, food containers, coffee cup lids,

drink bottles, straws for juice boxes — the list goes on and on. Plastic may be convenient, but its success carries a steep price.

In the first decade of this century, we made more plastic than all the plastic in history up to the year 2000. And every year,

billions of pounds of plastic end up in the world’s oceans.

Most ocean pollution starts out on land and is carried by wind and rain to the sea. Once in the water, there is a near-continuous

accumulation of waste. Plastic is so durable that the EPA reports “every bit of plastic ever made still exists.”

Most ocean pollution starts out on land and is carried by wind and rain to the sea. Once in the water, there is a near-continuous

accumulation of waste. Plastic is so durable that the EPA reports “every bit of plastic ever made still exists.”

Due to its low density, plastic waste is readily transported long distances from source areas and concentrates in gyres, systems of

rotating ocean currents. All five of the Earth's major ocean gyres are inundated with plastic pollution. But it's not limited to the

gyres; studies estimate there are 15–51 trillion pieces of plastic in the world's oceans — from the equator to the poles, from

Arctic ice sheets to the sea floor. Emerging research suggests that not one square mile of surface ocean anywhere on earth is

free of plastic pollution.

A HEAVY TOLL ON WILDLIFE

Adapted from the Center for Biological Diversity in California, for full text see: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/ocean_plastics/

Thousands of animals, from small finches to great white sharks, die grisly deaths from eating and getting caught in plastic:

o Fish in the North Pacific ingest 12,000 to 24,000 tons of plastic each year, which can cause intestinal injury and

death and transfers plastic up the food chain to bigger fish and marine mammals. A recent study found that a

quarter of fish at markets in California contained plastic in their guts, mostly in the form of plastic microfibers.

o Sea turtles also mistake floating plastic garbage for

food. While plastic bags are the most commonly

ingested item, loggerhead sea turtles have been

found with soft plastic, ropes, Styrofoam, and

monofilament lines in their stomachs. Ingestion of

plastic can lead to blockage in the gut, ulceration,

internal perforation and death; even if their organs

remain intact, turtles may suffer from false

sensations of satiation and slow or halt

reproduction. Tragically, the most current research

indicates that half of sea turtles worldwide have

ingested plastic.

o Hundreds of thousands of seabirds ingest plastic

every year. Plastic ingestion reduces the storage

volume of the stomach, causing birds to consume

less food and ultimately starve. Nearly all Laysan

albatross chicks — 97.5 percent — have plastic

pieces in their stomachs; their parents feed them

plastic particles mistaken for food. It’s estimated

that 60 percent of all seabird species have eaten pieces of plastic, with that number predicted to increase to 99

percent by 2050. Based on the amount of plastic found in seabird stomachs, the amount of garbage in our

oceans has rapidly increased in the past 40 years.

o Marine mammals ingest and get tangled in plastic. Large amounts of plastic debris have been found in the

habitat of endangered Hawaiian monk seals, including in areas that serve as pup nurseries. Entanglement deaths

are severely undermining recovery efforts of this seal, which is already on the brink of extinction. Entanglement

in plastic debris has also led to injury and mortality in the endangered Steller sea lion, with packing bands the

most common entangling material. In 2008 two sperm whales were found stranded along the California coast

with large amounts of fishing net scraps, rope and other plastic debris in their stomachs.

Plastic pollution doesn’t just hurt marine species. It’s also harmful to people.

As plastic debris floats in the seawater, it absorbs dangerous pollutants like PCBs, DDT and PAH. These chemicals are highly toxic

and have a wide range of chronic effects, including endocrine disruption and cancer-causing mutations. The concentration of

PCBs in plastics floating in the ocean has been documented as 100,000 to 1 million times that of surrounding waters. When

animals eat these plastic pieces, the toxins are absorbed into their body and passed up the food chain.

As plastics break apart in the ocean, they also release potentially toxic chemicals such as bisphenol A (BPA), which can then enter

the food web. When fish and other marine species mistake the plastic items for food, they ingest the particles and pass toxic

chemicals through the food chain and ultimately to our dinner plates.

Adapted from the Center for Biological Diversity in California, for full text see: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/ocean_plastics/

Plastic pollution affects our economy, costing us untold dollars spent in beach cleanups, tourism losses and damages to fishing

and aquaculture industries. Beaches and oceans have turned into landfills. Prime tourist destinations are now littered with

garbage. Kamilo Beach, in a remote corner of Hawaii, is now known as “Plastic Beach” for the tons of plastic debris that

accumulates on its shores.

www.rspca.org.uk Page 1 of 3

Balloon Releases

Threaten Wildlife

Thousands of balloons released into the

sky can make an impressive sight but

what goes up must come down. The

impact of balloons on animals and the

environment can be grave – often even

fatal.

The threat to wildlife and other animals

Deflated balloons or balloon fragments can look very

attractive as food to many different animals and any

fragments left on the ground or floating in water can

easily be eaten. Ingesting balloons can cause death by

blocking the digestive and/or respiratory tracts, and is

likely to be slow. This has been witnessed and

documented in marine turtles, dolphins, whales and

farm animals.

In 2013, DEFRA produced “Sky lanterns and helium

balloons - an assessment of the impacts to

livestock and the environment” in which they

identified the choking of a goat and the fatal choking of

a cow due to swallowing balloon fragments.

Many marine species have been found with balloons in

their stomachs, probably having mistaken them (as well

as plastic bags) for jellyfish, a staple food for many

species. Reports from the US and Canada have

confirmed that balloons are regularly ingested by sea

turtles; a researcher from the University of Texas for

example, studied sea turtles that had been found

stranded. Five per cent of these turtles were found to

have pieces of balloon and plastic bags in their

digestive system.

The “UK & Eire Marine and Turtle Strandings &

Sightings Annual Report 2002” reports on a green

turtle found in UK waters with a large fragment of a

balloon in its stomach and plastic in its oesophagus.

Cause of death was given as oesophageal and stomach

impaction. The “British Isles and Republic of Ireland

Marine Turtle Strandings and Sightings Annual

Report 2010” found, in 32 post-mortems, that 5 of those

turtles had evidence of litter ingestion.

The problem is getting worse as recent evidence shows

an increase in balloon-related litter. The Marine

Conservation Society (MCS) annual “Beachwatch”

survey in 2011 collected more than 1,359 balloons from

UK beaches, over three times as many found in 1996!

Following the findings of a conference in 1989 on plastic

and other debris found at sea, public concern led to the

cancellation of mass releases in many cities and

several states in the US and Canada.

An estimated 90-95 per cent of released balloons will

rise to an altitude of three kilometres and burst into

small fragments. The remaining balloons may float

many miles before descending to the ground or sea

semi-inflated. The largest-ever balloon release was 1.4

million balloons in the US – of those, it has been

reported that 140,000 could have fallen to the land.

Even small-scale releases and balloon races may have

a serious effect on the environment and animals – the

balloons are often not adequately inflated and the

attached strings, ribbons may entangle animals. Many

such balloons are also intentionally weighted with tags,

further increasing the likelihood of it landing at sea or in

the countryside.

Page 2 of 3

Balloon Releases Threaten Wildlife

Are ‘biodegradeable’ balloons safe?

Even if the balloons are marked as degradable they may take a number of weeks to „degrade‟, whereas it could

take only seconds for an animal to swallow a balloon or balloon fragment. Research states that latex balloons

degrade faster than oak leaves, a fact often used in defence of mass balloon releases. This is misleading

however as an oak leaf can take six months or longer to break down. Most of the balloons used in releases are

made of this „degradable latex‟ but many also have foil linings that take even longer to degrade.

What is being done?

Multiple animal welfare and conservation groups, including the

RSPCA, are calling for a ban on outdoor balloon and sky lantern

releases. The MCS run a national campaign “Don’t Let Go”

aimed at educating the public and pushing councils and

Government to make a change.

Opinions are now gradually changing in Britain as people realise

the damage balloons can cause. The MCS report a story of a

swift that grounded on the Suffolk coast having been entangled

in the ribbon of a balloon released in Essex. Luckily the bird was

still alive and the charity that had organised the balloon release

have agreed to do no more balloon releases, having been

shocked that their actions had led to this swift being grounded.

Following recent social media campaigns, the luxury cruise

company Cunard, the RNLI and other organisations have

cancelled planned balloon releases. Many local authorities, such

as Oxford City Council, have now adopted the MCS‟s message

and are actively discouraging their residents against holding

balloon releases.

Planning a balloon release?

The RSPCA feels that it would be lamentable if money were to be raised for one good cause only to find that it was

responsible for the blight of another. Both the marine and terrestrial environments are already heavily polluted and balloon

releases can only exacerbate the situation.

THE RSPCA URGES PEOPLE PLANNING BALLOON RELEASES TO RECONSIDER THE FOLLOWING POINTS.

What goes up must come down – all balloons released will fall back to earth either semi-deflated or in dozens of

potentially tiny and hard to retrieve

fragments, constituting a real hazard to both animals and their environment, both marine and terrestrial.

It is estimated that only five per cent of all balloons released will return intact.

While the known instances of ingestion are relatively few, compared to other known causes of animal mortality, it is likely

that these are representative of a greater problem.

Because we don‟t know the true extent of the threat posed by such activities a precautionary approach should be adopted,

i.e. don’t do it.

Page 3 of 3

Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Wilberforce Way, Southwater, Horsham, West Sussex RH13 9RS 0300 1234 999 www.rspca.org.uk facebook.com/RSPCA twitter.com/RSPCA_official The RSPCA helps animals in England and Wales. Registered charity no. 219099. The RSPCA only exists with the support of public donations. © RSPCA 2015. Photos: Razorbill - Christine McGuinness and MCS / U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters x2, Coyau - Wikimedia Commons

What you can do!

Don‟t let go of balloons if you are outside.

If you find a balloon displaying a company or

organisation name, send it back to them with a copy

of this factsheet.

If you hear about a release, write to the organisers,

explain the likely consequences and ask them to

reconsider urging them to think of an alternative

way of celebrating their next event.

Use latex rather than mylar or foil balloons. Do not

attach plastic ribbon, tags or other labels to the

balloons.

If using balloons outside, make sure they are

securely tied down. Make sure to use natural cotton

string.

Use air to inflate balloons, rather than helium.

Always tie balloons by hand, don‟t use plastic

valves.

Express your concern about the environmental

impacts of balloon releases by writing to the

National Association of Balloon Artists and

Suppliers (NABAS), Katepwa House, Ashfield Park

Avenue, Ross-On-Wye HR9 5AX, Tel: 01989

762204.

Take part in the MCS‟s annual “Beachwatch”

project.

Alternatives

These kinds of alternatives mean that the balloons used can

be cut up and disposed of in closed litter-bins following the

event, rather than being released into the environment.

Positive promotion of these environmentally friendly events

could be advantageous to the organisers when raising

money and any balloon manufacturers that advocate or

promote such an initiative.

Use the same balloons intended for release to build

balloon statues, then sell balloon numbers through a

lottery or raffle style competition.

You could put raffle tickets in a few balloons, blow them

up indoors and sell tickets to pop each one, the winners

being those who pop a balloon holding a ticket.

You could also fill something (car, phone box, room etc)

up with balloons and sell tickets to guess how many

balloons the space contains.

Some organisations (such as the RSPB) have launched

„virtual balloon races‟ where each balloon‟s progress can

be tracked on Google Maps. These can be „launched‟ for

any charitable cause, campaign or for loved ones.

Further information

RSPCA – Litter

http://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/litter

The Marine Conservation Society – Don’t Let Go

http://www.mcsuk.org/what_we_do/Clean+seas+and+beaches/Campaigns+and+policy/Don't+let+go+-+balloons+and+sky+lanterns

Balloons Blow ... Don’t Let Them Go!

http://balloonsblow.org/

UK Rivers Network – Balloon Releases: Pollution Factsheet

http://www.ukrivers.net/balloon_fact.html

Balloon Releases Threaten Wildlife

CIGARETTE BUTTS: A TOXIC THREAT TO CREEKS AND THE BAY Cigarette butts have been the most commonly collected items on Coastal Cleanup Day for the last 20 years, amounting to almost 40% of total litter by item.i This should not be surprising, because over 300 billion cigarettes are consumed in the U.S. every yearii, and data show that two-thirds are littered onto our streets and then wash into waterways.iii While the human health impacts of cigarettes are common knowledge, the widespread environmental impacts are less well known. Cigarette litter costs cities millions of dollars to clean upiv, is toxic to Bay wildlife, and spoils water quality. Cigarette butts along our shorelines are also a quality of life issue, where they create visual blight, and can be picked up and ingested by small children and pets. Plastic cigarette butts are littered in staggering amounts

65% of cigarettes on average are litteredv Smoking by Californians averages out to 34 packs a year for every person in the state vi 7.15 million people live in the Bay Areavii

** Over 3 billion cigarettes butts are littered in the Bay Area each year **

• In the Bay Area, on Coastal Cleanup Day 2012, Alameda County cleanups topped the list with almost 17,000 cigarette butts

collected. Not far behind were Marin County locations, tallying more than 13,000. San Francisco locations alone accounted for more than 12,500 cigarette butts.

Cigarette butts are plastic, and not biodegradable, as is commonly assumed • Filters are composed of a type of plastic called cellulose acetate; like other plastics, they do not biodegrade and instead

persist as litter in the environment. • Cigarette filters were introduced in the 1950s in an unsuccessful effort to address health concerns associated with smoking;

although they reduce tar and nicotine yields, they do not effectively protect smokers from disease.viii Cigarette butts are toxic to wildlife and spoil water quality • Cigarette butts contain a variety of hazardous chemicals and heavy metals, including lead, chromium, and arsenic, which

leach into water when they are littered.ix • These chemicals are acutely toxic to fish – a 2009 study found that the chemicals in a single filtered cigarette butt have the

ability to kill half the fish living in a 1-liter container of water.x • Birds, fish, and other wildlife can mistake filters for food, leading to death by choking or malnutrition. Tobacco litter is costly to cities • Before it passed its Cigarette Litter Abatement Fee in 2009, the City of San Francisco documented that it spends close to $6

million per year on cigarette litter removal.xi

i California Coastal Commission. “Countdown to Trash Extinction Campaign.” Available at http://www.coastal.ca.gov/publiced/ccd/extinct.html ii “Consumption of Cigarettes and Combustible Tobacco — United States, 2000–2011.” 3 August 2012. Available at:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6130a1.htm iii Keep America Beautiful. “Key Findings: Cigarette Butt Litter.” available at http://www.kab.org/site/DocServer/LitterFactSheet_CIGARETTE.pdf?docID=5182 iv J Schneider et al. 22 June 2009. “Estimates of the Costs of Tobacco Litter in San Francisco and Calculations of Maximum Permissible Per-Pack Fees.” Health Economics Consulting Group LLC. Available at: http://www.sfdpw.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/sfdpw/director/annual_reports/tobacco_litter_study_hecg_062209%5B1%5D.pdf v Action Research for Keep America Beautiful. January 2009. “Littering Behavior in America: Results of a National Study.” Action Research, San Marcos, CA.

Available at: http://www.kab.org/site/DocServer/KAB_Report_Final_2.pdf?docID=4581 vi R Chapman. 24 September 2013. “California Tobacco Control Program.” (PowerPoint slides) Available at:

http://sbud.senate.ca.gov/sites/sbud.senate.ca.gov/files/SUB3/CDPH%20-%20Tobacco%20Control%20Program.pptx vii Bay Area Census. “San Francisco Bay Area.” Available at: http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/bayarea.htm viii B Harris. 2011. “The intractable cigarette ‘filter problem.’” Tobacco Control Vol 20 (Supplemental Issue 1) p.i10 ix American Legacy Foundation. (Infographic.) Available at: http://legacyforhealth.org/issues/toxic-waste.php x E Slaughter et al. 2011. “Toxicity of cigarette butts, and their chemical components, to marine and freshwater fish.” Tobacco Control Vol 20

(Supplemental Issue 1) p. i25–i29. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088407/ xi J Schneider et al. 2011. “Tobacco litter costs and public policy: a framework and methodology for considering the use of fees to offset abatement costs.”

Tobacco Control Vol 20 (Supplemental Issue 1) p.i36

Let's get serious about cigarette litter — no ifs, ands or butts!

August 8, 2013 | 14 comments

Adapted from an article by David Suzuki with contributions from Ian Hanington, Communications

Manager; for full text see: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2013/08/-lets-get-

serious-about-cigarette-litter-no-ifs-ands-or-butts/

...many smokers to litter their butts without giving it a second thought. It's astounding how many people

who would likely not otherwise drop garbage on the ground see nothing wrong with flicking butts

without regard for where they land. It may seem trivial, but it's not.

According to the Surfrider Foundation's Hold on to Your Butt campaign, cigarette butts are the most

littered item in the world, with 4.95-trillion tossed onto the ground or water every year. The U.S. spends

about $11-billion a year on litter clean-up, and 32 per cent of that is butts. They're washed from the

streets into storm drains and rivers and eventually to oceans and are the most prevalent type of debris

collected in beach clean-ups around the world.

The environmental impacts are nothing to sneeze at, either. Surfrider notes that cigarette butts are

made of "cellulose acetate, a non-biodegradable plastic, which can take up to 25 years to decompose."

The toxic butts can be ingested by children and animals, especially birds and marine animals. Tossed

cigarette butts are also a major fire risk.

Obviously, the best way to reduce cigarette butt pollution is to step up efforts to prevent people from

starting smoking and help those who have to quit. But we aren't going to stop everyone from smoking

overnight, so we have to find ways to address the litter problem. Again, a combination of public

education and regulation will go a long way.

In San Diego, Surfrider installed outdoor ashcans and gave smokers pocket ashtrays. Many places,

including Vancouver, have banned smoking on beaches and in parks. Stepping up enforcement of litter

laws also helps. Some people even recommend banning filtered cigarettes or at least requiring filters to

be biodegradable, arguing they're more of a marketing ploy than a safety feature. In Vancouver and

other cities, some people have been pushing for a deposit-and-return system similar to those for bottles

and cans.

Five Fast Facts on Microplastics

From: http://www.ecopartnersinc.com/2016/03/15/five-fast-facts-on-microplastics/

1. Each year, 8 million tons of plastics enter our oceans; that

is equivalent to dumping a truckload of plastics into the

ocean every minute.

2. Plastics in the ocean do not biodegrade, but rather break

into smaller and smaller pieces. When combined with

microplastics, such as microbeads in personal care

products, released directly into waterways, the majority

of plastics in the ocean are less than 5 millimeters in size

(less than 1/4 inch).

3. Microplastics and the chemicals that attach to them in the water can contaminate the food

chain, including seafood products eaten by people.

4. In 2015, the federal Microbead-Free Waters Act became law. This law requires that companies

stop using tiny beads of plastic in personal care products, where they were used as abrasives, by

July 2017. (A similar law was passed in California in October 2015 that would have established

the same ban effective January 1, 2020.) Microbeads are commonly used in facial cleansers,

toothpaste, and cosmetics.

5. Fleece and synthetic clothing shed microplastics into the water with each washing. In fact, a

fleece jacket sheds about 2,000 pieces of plastic per washing. Wastewater treatment plants do

not have the ability to screen these tiny pieces, meaning they end up in both the discharged

water and the sludge that is composted. Learn more in this short video.

What can you do to reduce microplastics pollution? Here are five fast things to do!

1. Avoid products with microbeads before the product ban goes into effect. Look for the words

“polyethylene” or “polystyrene” on the ingredient label.

2. Wash fleece and other synthetic fabrics less often. This also saves water and energy.

3. Don’t litter, and pick up the litter you see. Take part in beach and other litter cleanups.

4. Close the lid on your trash and recycling carts when you place them at the curb.

5. Carry and use reusable shopping bags. Say “no thanks” to single-use plastic bags.

Sources: “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of Plastics” (2016), Project MainStream, a

collaboration of the World Economic Forum, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, and McKinsey & Company;

“Scientific Evidence Supports a Ban on Microbeads” (2015), Society for Conservation Biology; “From

Fleece Jackets to Your Food: The Scary Journey of Microplastics” (2015), National Geographic

From NOAA website: http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html and

https://usresponserestoration.wordpress.com/2015/06/12/how-beach-cleanups-help-keep-

microplastics-out-of-the-garbage-patches/

What are microplastics?

Microplastics are small plastic pieces less than five millimeters long which can be harmful to our

ocean and aquatic life.

Microplastics seen during the 2014 Northwestern Hawaiian Islands marine debris removal mission.

Plastic is the most prevalent type of marine debris found in our ocean and Great Lakes. Plastic debris can

come in all shapes and sizes, but those that are less than five millimeters in length (or about the size of a

sesame seed) are called “microplastics.”

Microbeads are tiny pieces of polyethylene plastic added to health

and beauty products, such as some cleansers and toothpastes.

As an emerging field of study, not a lot is known about microplastics

and their impacts yet. The NOAA Marine Debris Program is leading

efforts within NOAA to research this topic. Standardized field

methods for collecting sediment, sand, and surface-water microplastic samples have been developed

and continue to undergo testing. Eventually, field and laboratory protocols will allow for global

comparisons of the amount of microplastics released into the environment, which is the first step in

determining the final distribution, impacts, and fate of this debris.

Microplastics come from a variety of sources, including from larger plastic debris that degrades into

smaller and smaller pieces. In addition, microbeads, a type of microplastic, are very tiny pieces of

manufactured polyethylene plastic that are added as exfoliants to health and beauty products, such as

some cleansers and toothpastes. These tiny particles easily pass through water filtration systems and

end up in the ocean and Great Lakes, posing a potential threat to aquatic life.

Microbeads are not a recent problem. According to the United Nations Environment Programme, plastic

microbeads first appeared in personal care products about fifty years ago, with plastics increasingly

replacing natural ingredients. As recently as 2012, this issue was still relatively unknown, with an

abundance of products containing plastic microbeads on the market and not a lot of awareness on the

part of consumers.

On December 28, 2015, President Obama signed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, banning

plastic microbeads in cosmetics and personal care products.

Did you know?

Microplastics can come from a variety of sources including larger plastic pieces that have broken apart,

resin pellets used for plastic manufacturing, or in the form of microbeads, which are small,

manufactured plastic beads used in health and beauty products.

How Beach Cleanups Help Keep Microplastics out of the Garbage Patches

June 12, 2015 by Ashley Braun

Cleaning up a few plastic bottles on a beach

can make a big difference when it comes to

keeping microplastics from entering the

ocean. (NOAA)

These days plastic seems to be everywhere;

unfortunately, that includes many parts of

the ocean, from the garbage patches to

Arctic sea ice. With this pollution

increasingly in the form of tiny plastic bits,

picking up a few bottles left on the beach

can feel far removed from the massive

problem of miniscule plastics floating out at

sea.

However, these two issues are more closely connected than you may think.

But how do we get from a large plastic water bottle, blown out of an overfilled trash can on a beach, to

innumerable plastic pieces no bigger than a sesame seed—and known as microplastics—suspended a

few inches below the ocean surface thousands of miles from land?

The answer starts with the sun and an understanding of how plastic deteriorates in the environment.

The Science of Creating Microplastics

Plastic starts breaking down, or degrading, when exposed to light and high temperatures from the sun.

Ultraviolet B radiation (UVB), the same part of the light spectrum that can cause sunburns and skin

cancer, starts this process for plastics.

This process, known as photo-oxidation, is a chemical reaction that uses oxygen to break the links in the

molecular chains that make up plastic. It also happens much faster on land than in the comparatively

cool waters of the ocean.

For example, a hot day at the beach can heat the sandy surface—and plastic trash sitting on it—up to

104 degrees Fahrenheit. The ocean, on the other hand, gets darker and colder the deeper you go, and

the average temperatures at its surface in July can range from 45 degrees Fahrenheit near Adak Island,

Alaska, to 89 degrees in Cannon Bay, Florida.

Back on that sunny, warm beach, a plastic water bottle starts to show the effects of photo-oxidation. Its

surface becomes brittle and tiny cracks start forming. Those larger shards of plastic break apart into

smaller and smaller pieces, but they keep roughly the same molecular structure, locked into hydrogen

and carbon chains. A brisk wind or child playing on the beach may cause this brittle outer layer of plastic

to crumble. The tide washes these now tiny plastics into the ocean.

Once in the ocean, the process of degrading slows down for the remains of this plastic bottle. It can sink

below the water surface, where less light and heat penetrate and less oxygen is available. In addition,

plastics can quickly become covered in a thin film of marine life, which further blocks light from reaching

the plastic and breaking it down.

An Incredible Journey

Microplastics, tiny bits of plastic measuring

5 millimeters or less, are often the result of

larger pieces of plastic breaking down on

land before making it into the ocean. They

can also come from cosmetics and fleece

clothing. (NOAA)

In general, plastic breaks down much,

much more slowly in the ocean than on

land. That means plastic objects that reach

the ocean either directly from a boat (say

trash or nets from a fishing vessel) or

washed into the sea before much

degradation has happened are much less

likely to break into smaller pieces that

become microplastics. This also applies to

plastics that sink below the ocean surface

into the water column or seafloor.

Instead, plastic that has spent time heating up and breaking down on land is most likely to produce the

microplastics eventually accumulating in ocean gyres or garbage patches, a conclusion supported by the

research of North Carolina State University professor Anthony Andrady and others.

Of course, microplastics in the form of “microbeads” in face wash and other cosmetics or microfibers in

fleece clothing also can reach the ocean by slipping through waste water treatment systems.

However, regularly patrolling your favorite beach or waterway and cleaning up any plastic or other

marine debris can go a long way to keeping millions of tiny microplastics—some so tiny they can only be

seen with a microscope—from reaching the garbage patches and other areas of the ocean.

The great thing is anyone can do this and you don’t have to wait for the International Coastal Cleanup

each September to get started.

Find more tips and resources to help you on your way:

Solutions to marine debris | NOAA Marine Debris Program

Marine Debris Tracker app for smartphones

Detecting Microplastics in the Marine Environment | NOAA Marine Debris Program

Proceedings from two research summits hosted by NOAA and the University of Washington in

2008 and 2010:

o 2008: International Research Workshop on Microplastic Marine Debris

o 2010: Second Research Workshop on Microplastic Marine Debris

How Styrofoam is Bad for the Environment

By Vijayalaxmi Kinhal Ecologist full text at:

http://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/How_Styrofoam_is_Bad_for_the_Environment

Although many people have heard that Styrofoam is detrimental

to the planet, few understand how Styrofoam harms the

environment. Find out the impact Styrofoam has on the planet to

help you minimize the damage caused by this material.

Styrofoam Is Expanded Polystyrene

Styrofoam has become such an accepted everyday product that

people rarely stop to realize that it is made from polystyrene, a

petroleum-based plastic. In fact, Styrofoam is a trade name for

expanded polystyrene (EPS), points out a 2015 BBC report. It explains that polystyrene beads are processed

using chemicals that are steamed and expand, creating the substance EPS. It gained popularity because it is

lightweight; it's 95% air. It offers good insulation properties that keep products cold or hot, and keeps things

safe during the shipping process without adding weight.

However, over the years information about harmful effects of Styrofoam/EPS on people's health and the

environment have been accumulating.

Environmental Health Concerns

Environmental health concerns start with the elements used to make Styrofoam. Styrene, for example, is the

one of the main ingredients used to make polystyrene. Though the American Chemistry Council notes there are

differences in polystyrene (solid) and styrene (liquid), and while there are differences in the final makeup,

styrene is still part of polystyrene.

Possible Carcinogen

The International Agency for Research on Cancer had already established styrene as a possible human

carcinogen in 2002. So does a 2014 National Toxicological Program report on carcinogens (page 1) which

classifies styrene as "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen" and being linked to occurrence of

leukemia and lymphoma cancer.

Occupational Health Hazards

Though the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report on styrene does not yet classify it as carcinogenic, it

lists many occupational hazards for those who are exposed regularly in the manufacture of products made with

styrene. Some of the acute health effects experienced include irritation of the skin, eyes, and the upper

respiratory tract and gastrointestinal effects.

The EPA report says chronic exposure to styrene leads to further complications, including adverse effects on the

nervous and respiratory systems, and possibly the kidney and liver, as well as other issues. It also caused

increased spontaneous abortions in women. Contact with liquid styrene during the manufacturing process can

lead to first degree burns according to an NIH report.

Food Contamination

Food in Styrofoam containers can be contaminated by chemicals that leach into the

food, affecting human health and the reproductive systems. This is accentuated if

people reheat the food while still in the container. A research study shows that

styrene can leach out from EPS. Even the American Chemistry Council admits that

there is transmission of styrene from Styrofoam to food, albeit in minute quantities.

So people using Styrofoam do get contaminated by styrene, and can suffer from its

health impacts.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) wants EPA to ban styrene as it has been

found in 40% of Americans. As the NIH report points out, containers are only one

way that styrene can get into human bodies.

Air Pollution From Manufacturing Processes

Air pollution due to proximity to industries that make Styrofoam are another channel to get exposed to Styrene,

according to the NIH report. Many of the chemicals used in the manufacturing process are toxic, and workers

who make them are at greatest risk. Moreover, emissions from these factories can pollute the air, and the liquid

and solid waste produced need disposal.

Hydrofluorocarbon Past Use

HFCs, or hydrofluorocarbons used initially in the manufacture of Styrofoam, were released during production

processes, although they have now been replaced. However, damage has been done as HFCs contribute to to

global warming. Now Styrofoam production uses cardon dioxide and pentane instead of that pollutant.

Benzene

Benzene is another key ingredient used in making Styrofoam.

It is considered a carcinogenic that is foremost an occupational hazard, even causing leukemia in severe

cases, according to EPA.

It is a Volatile Organic Compound classified as a key pollutant by EPA, that is mainly in air, but reaches

soil and water when washed down by rain and snow. It can then enter underground supplies, because it

can dissolve in water to some extent, according to an NIH report.

Dioxins

Dioxins are Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP) that are used in manufacturing polystyrene.

Dioxins cause immune and hormonal problems and affect fetal development as an occupational hazard

to workers exposed to it.

When Styrofoam is burnt for energy or for disposal, it is released into the environment leading to air

pollution and health problems when inhaled by people and animals.

Expanded Polystyrene Is Non-Biodegradable

Styrofoam appears to last forever as it is resistant to photolysis, or the breaking down of materials by photons

originating from a light source. Cleveland State University states that it requires more than a million years to

decompose.

Production Rates and Recycling

According to Scientific American, in 2014 a total of 28,500 tons of Styrofoam

was produced and 90% was used to make single-use cups, trays, containers and

packaging products. Other major uses of Styrofoam are as insulation boards for

roofs, walls, floors in buildings, and as loose packaging material called packing

peanuts.

While it can be recycled, the recycling market is diminishing. In many

communities, people are told that their recycling companies will not accept

polystyrene products. Facilities for curbside collection or drop off centers for

packaging material and food containers are not evenly distributed in the USA.

Those that are recycled are remanufactured into things like cafeteria trays or packing filler. Some states like

Texas do not accept packaging peanuts for recycling as they break easily and pollute the environment, so keep

an eye on what can and cannot be recycled if there is a center near you.

It is difficult to recycle on a large scale due to its production process according to the 2015 BBC report. And this

has been the reason many cities and towns are banning use of Styrofoam, according to a 2015 MSNBC report.

Resulting Environmental Problems Due to Waste

The amounts of Styrofoam waste that accumulates is colossal,

as only 1% of Styrofoam is recycled in California according to a

2016 Los Angeles Times news report. Problems created due to

large amounts of waste include the following:

Styrofoam easily breaks into small bits. Small land and

aquatic animals eating these pieces die due to toxins

and blockage of their stomachs leading to starvation,

according to Los Angeles Times.

This, combined with the fact that Styrofoam is

lightweight and therefore floats, means that over time a great deal of polystyrene has accumulated

along coasts and waterways around the world. It is one of the main components of marine debris.

Given its porous nature it absorbs many other carcinogenic pollutants in the sea water like DDT

produced in other countries, according to Los Angeles Times.

Much of it sinks to the bottom of the sea where it pollutes the seabed. When the fish eat toxic materials

in Styrofoam and the additional pollutants it absorbs, the chemicals bioaccumulate and can harm people

who consume this seafood according to the Los Angeles Times.

Non-Sustainable

Another reason that Styrofoam is harmful for the environment is that it is made with petroleum, which is a non-

sustainable resource. A 2016 Worldwatch Report notes that "About 4 percent of the petroleum consumed

worldwide each year is used to make plastic, and another 4 percent is used to power plastic manufacturing

processes." In addition, petroleum production creates heavy pollution.

Alternatives to Styrofoam

Coming up with a suitable replacement for Styrofoam/EPS has been quite a challenge for scientists, although

there is hope.

A company called Ecovative Design has created a line of products product made from fungi that are

Styrofoam-like and aspire to be a more environmentally friendly replacement for structural components

like packaging material.

There are many different bio-composite materials available as insulation that can replace Styrofoam in

construction.

Reduce Styrofoam usage by foregoing single-use items. Use or ask for paper cups instead of Styrofoam.

Many coffee outlets, university cafes and Slurpee retailers offer a discount when customers bring their

own mugs and cups. Some even offer the possibility of sharing mugs.

Make an Eco-Friendly Choice

Reducing dependance on Styrofoam is the best way to decrease its production and effect on the environment. If

you want to make eco-friendly choices to eliminate the use of Styrofoam, look for products manufactured from

renewable resources, containing biodegradable materials, and those that are easily recycled.

From: https://urbanful.org/2014/11/18/the-litterati-impact/

On a warm spring afternoon in Oakland, Jeff Kirschner was walking with his two children along one of their favorite

neighborhood trails. As they walked, his daughter, then 4 years old, spotted a patch of bright yellow under a tree; as

they got closer, they realized it was the lid of a container of kitty litter. “Daddy,” she said, “that doesn’t go there.”

Kirschner agreed: the remnants of a box of kitty litter didn’t belong there, covered in brush under a tree. It belonged in

the trash. After all, that’s what we’re taught to do with things when we are done with them: throw them away.

Kirschner and his kids walked over together, picked up the container and took it to the nearest trashcan.

His daughter’s straightforward observation—trash doesn’t belong there, let’s put it where it belongs—triggered

something inside of Kirschner. While the 42-year-old writer, consultant, and entrepreneur is not exactly a stereotypical

environmentalist, that day made him want to do something.

“It’s small, but it’s tangible and real. That straw is no longer there. That cigarette is no longer there. And that felt like it

could be useful.”

Kirschner started to take pictures of the litter that he found and picked up. He could see in his Instagram history the

pieces of garbage that he had thrown away over the course of the day, and it felt good. He got his wife to do it, and his

brother, and her brother. Each night, they could collectively pat themselves on the back for picking up a few pieces of

trash. “I knew that I had done something good, and it was quantifiable in a certain way,” Kirschner explained to me

when we met at a park in Oakland. “It’s small, but it’s tangible and real. That straw is no longer there. That cigarette is

no longer there. And that felt like it could be useful.”

And so Litterati—a social media movement that is changing the way we look at, and

catalog, litter—was born.

#litterati. That’s the hashtag. See a piece of litter, post of picture of it on Instagram, throw

the trash away. Simple.

Ok. Great. “What’s the big deal?” some might ask. It’s easy to view this, with some

skepticism, as a typical millennial experience: do something altruistic, compliment

yourself for it by posting it on the Internet, and blow way out of proportion the amount of

good you are actually doing. The Ice Bucket Challenge of trash collection, if you will.

But hashtags grow. Kirschner, a former ad man, came up with the name “Litterati” and snagged the Instagram account

and litterati.org domain. Eventually, he began to see strangers posting pictures of their trash with the #litterati hashtag.

He worked with an engineer friend to create an online photo gallery that featured all the pictures with the #litterati

hashtag, dubbing it the Digital Landfill. When Kirschner’s brother-in-law posted a picture of a plastic wrapper in front of

the Great Wall of China, the website expanded to feature a map.

The #litterati hashtag has more than 80,000 posts from users throughout the world, picking up about 1,000 pictures of

salvaged trash each week.

When Kirschner started posting pictures of trash, he would be lucky to get five likes. Now, the Litterati Instagram

account has more than 16,200 followers. The #litterati hashtag has more than 80,000 posts from users throughout the

world, picking up about 1,000 pictures of salvaged trash each week.

Together in the park in Oakland, we saw a discarded Starbucks plastic iced coffee cup. Kirschner took a picture and

posted it; by the time we had walked to the nearest trash can to throw it out, the post had already earned two dozen

likes.

Litter is one of our oldest and most basic problems. For centuries, humans have cast aside items when they are done

with them: into a pile to be burned, into a river or ocean, or onto the streets. Our industrialized world has seen the

advancement of trash removal, but, much more so, a dramatic increase in the number of things we use and throw away,

like single-use plastics. We make, consume, and discard at alarming rates, and it’s no exaggeration to say that our

streets, parks, rivers and oceans are now full of litter. By some counts, 9 billion tons of litter are dumped each year into

the world’s oceans alone.

“Parks are some of the worst offenders,” Kirschner said as we sat together, watching Little League practice, talking about

trash. “My guess is that in this park alone, even just in our vision, there’s probably 5,000 pieces of litter, minimum.”

Litter is an eyesore, but it’s more than that: it’s an expensive eyesore. In 2009, Keep America Beautiful conducted a

study on the economic effects of litter and found that litter clean-up projects in this country cost roughly $11.5 billion a

year. What’s more, trash-filled neighborhoods hurt property values by roughly 7 percent, according to the National

Association of Home Builders.

Litter is only the final, most obvious flaw of our frenzied culture of production and consumption

Litter is only the final, most obvious flaw of our frenzied culture of production and consumption, the way Kirschner sees

it. The bigger issue is our disconnected relationship with many of the products we use. The aluminum foil wrapper on a

burrito is only in someone’s life for as long as it takes him or her to eat the burrito, but it takes considerable effort to get

the foil to the restaurant in the first place. Likewise, after the garbage collector takes it from the trash can, it will sit in a

landfill for a hundred years or more until it decomposes. But it’s only if the foil ends up on the streets that we register

and identify it as part of the problem: litter.

While creating a litter-free world—Litterati’s goal—is going to take a lot more than photographing 1,000 pieces of litter

each week, it has started some conversations, largely through moments of viral exposure on social media (Instagram

featured Litterati on their blog on Earth Day 2014). But the true revolution is in the data attached to each photo. Each

hashtagged picture comes with a time stamp and a geotag, which means when you use it, you aren’t only cleaning up

litter: you’re cataloging it. You’re leaving a data trail of when and where you found litter and, with additional hashtags,

like #plastic, #Starbucks and #cup, what kind of litter. By comparison, well-intentioned people have cleaned up litter for

as long as it’s existed. At the end of those litter walks, the volunteers bag all the trash and weigh it, which produces

numbers for how many bags of trash, or how much weight, was taken off the streets. But those numbers don’t tell you

anything about what kind of trash was collected, or where.

In other words, #litterati is Big Data in the world of litter removal. Big Data has already improved traffic reporting with

user-generated data in popular app Waze and weather reporting through WeatherSignal and WeatherMob. Litterati

takes the embedded features of Instagram to make trash collecting an exercise in data collection.

While Kirschner publishes the Digital Landfill and a Google Map of the hashtagged photos on the Litterati website, he

also has a private searchable database. The database can be sorted by user name, location, time and type.

“You want to see what Jane Doe picked up, between January 1 and February 1, in downtown San Jose? We can show

you that,” he says.

The backend data collection is what makes #litterati more than

just a cool way to get people to pick up trash. The data of trash

has not been explored, and the ease of hashtagging a photo on

Instagram turns everyone into a potential citizen-

scientist/activist. The more people hashtag, the more trash is

picked up; with every piece of trash that is picked up, more data

is collected. This data is a gold mine for cities who want to stay

cleaner, schools who want to reduce their output and brands

who want to cut down on their waste.

At one of the many litter walks Kirschner has joined to spread

word about Litterati, a skeptical volunteer raised her hand as he

explained the merits of data collection. “You’ve been taking

pictures of trash for two years, but I’ve been picking it up for 15

years. Are you telling me that all that trash that I’ve cleaned up

over the years doesn’t count?”

“Of course it counts,” Kirschner responded. “It just hasn’t been

counted.”

Not surprisingly, the first place Litterati has demonstrated its

practical applications in data collection is in a school.

Levi Hanzel-Sello, an elementary school teacher at Fremont Open

Plan, a public school based in Modesto, California, met Kirschner

at a plastics conference in Monterey. Hanzel-Sello said he and his

fellow teachers were launching a year-long exploration with their

students to explore whether or not their school was a healthy,

sustainable place. He had just secured 20 iPads from the

Monterey Bay Aquarium, to be used however he deemed fit. And

then Kirschner explained Litterati.

“Taking pictures of litter might seem like a tiny little thing, but it’s a step in the direction of inspiring kids to observe the

world around them, and know that they can make a difference”

“Litterati was perfect for us,” Hanzel-Sello told me when we chatted over the phone. “Not only did it make cleaning up

trash fun, but we generated meaningful data as a result of it. Litterati was the backbone tool that helped us explore our

question.”

Hanzel-Sello created a single Instagram account for his class, logged all 20 iPads into it and spent class time with his kids

picking up litter on their campus. They found discarded paper, food wrappers and lots and lots of little straws from juice

boxes. With each picture, they had their photo posted on the Internet (exhilarating for 4th and 5th graders). In doing so,

they also added a new piece of data to Litterati’s database, which they could access and analyze.

After a few weeks, Hanzel-Sello’s students reported their findings to the school with some solutions.

“Look at how many straw wrappers we collected, so let’s stop using straws,” was one. “There is a lot of discarded paper

on these parts of campus, so let’s put recycling bins there,” was another. Hanzel-Sello had been petitioning for more

trash cans and a recycling program for a while, but when his students brought the concerns to the school

administration—with hard data about what litter problems exist and where—his request was answered in a few days.

“Schools represent about 5 to 8 percent of a city’s waste stream. When I saw Litterati, I immediately knew: this is what

we need. Let’s put this power in the hands of kids as changemakers for green schools.”

“One in five Americans spends their day at a K-12 school,” Deborah Moore, executive director of the Green Schools

Initiative, told me. Which means “schools represent about 5 to 8 percent of a city’s waste stream. When I saw Litterati, I

immediately knew: this is what we need. Let’s put this power in the hands of kids as changemakers for green schools.”

Just like volunteers at urban clean-ups, most school audits of waste involved the vague method of weighing materials, or

the extremely laborious process of actually counting and tallying things using paper and pencil and then typing it into a

database. Not impossible, but slow and clunky.

“Taking pictures of litter might seem like a tiny little thing, but it’s a step in the direction of inspiring kids to observe the

world around them, and know that they can make a difference,” Moore says.

In talking to Kirschner, he admits that while he may have unlocked a way to collect data about litter, he doesn’t

necessarily know how to use it.

“I figure there are a lot of smart people out there who will know how to apply it in their own way,” he says.

Hanzel-Sello is one such example. Kirschner’s work with Moore to create a scalable curriculum around Litterati is

another. And in August 2014, Litterati was awarded a grant to work with the County of Alameda, home to Oakland and

Berkeley, to implement a curriculum that will, one school at a time, get students dialed into trash and data collecting.

Cities have also caught notice of Litterati, the most notable being San Francisco.

In 2009, San Francisco imposed a $0.01 litter tax on every cigarette sold in the city after a litter audit found that 25

percent of street litter was from cigarettes. In 2013, the city wanted an update on the audit to confirm that the data was

still valid.

Ruth Abbe, a vice president at HDR who specializes in zero-waste consulting, worked with San Francisco and Litterati for

the 2013 litter audit. HDR’s workers didn’t stand around with clipboards and papers like they did before, but instead

used their smartphones to take pictures of every piece of trash they saw in designated sites throughout the city. And

while previous litter audits were just about study and not actual clean-ups, Kirschner insisted that, if they were going to

hashtag, they had to pick up the trash as well.

“In previous audits, we would hand count every single piece of litter on the assigned site,” she says. “Using Litterati was

a huge improvement in our process.”

While the 2013 litter audit was specifically focused on cigarettes, HDR took photos of every piece of litter they saw and

picked up, which meant all of that data was on the books in case the city ever wants to go back and look at it from a

different angle—say, how many coffee cups were picked up, or if plastic bags are still a major problem even after being

banned in October of 2013.

“The practical effect of all this data is that it gives a city like San Francisco the tools to address problem products, like

coffee cups, to pass regulations, pass laws, or collect fees,” Abbe added.

Litterati can have that effect: once you start to see litter, you can’t unsee it. With the data in hand, Litterati isn’t only

cleaning up trash; it’s helping to prevent it.

Litterati also partnered with the City of San Jose on Valentine’s Day this year, as part of a “Love Your City” campaign that

rewarded residents who hashtagged their trash with gift cards to restaurants, or tickets to San Jose Sharks games and

Cirque Du Soleil shows. On the education end, Hanzel-Sello hears from some of the parents of his students that when

families go on beach vacations, the kids want to spend their time picking up trash. Or, when out at restaurants, the kids

insist that no one at the table uses straws. Litterati can have that effect: Once you start to see litter, you can’t unsee it.

With the data in hand, Litterati isn’t only cleaning up trash; it’s helping to prevent it.

And then, there’s the corporate world. So far, Kirschner’s contact with corporations has mostly been around public

relations. For instance, on Earth Day 2013, a Whole Foods Market in Kirschner’s neighborhood gave people a free cup of

coffee if they showed up with a hashtagged photo of a piece of litter they picked up. On Coastal Cleanup Day 2014,

Chipotle sponsored a photo contest for the best picture of cleaned trash, with the winner getting a year’s worth of free

burritos. These endorsements by companies have boosted the social component of Litterati, an element that Kirschner

will always support, but they admittedly do not yet reflect a corporate commitment to doing something about the data

behind their own trash.

“Imagine if I could sit down with Starbucks, and show them the data of how many of their coffee cups have ended up on

our streets,” Kirschner says. “Bring in five photos of hashtagged, picked up Starbucks cups, and maybe Starbucks gives

you a free reusable coffee mug. It’s a win for the consumer, a win for the environment and a public relations win for the

corporation.”

It’s a nice aspiration, but one that has yet to materialize. While Kirschner is eagerly knocking at the doors of schools and

city halls, he is waiting until he has even more widespread data before he sits down with multi-national corporations.

Malcolm Gladwell famously critiqued “clickactivism” and the limits of social media in The New Yorker in 2010 when he

wrote that “the revolution will not be tweeted.” For whatever reasons, social media campaigns can somehow rub

people the wrong way, no matter how genuine. The Ice Bucket Challenge is a great example of that.

Litterati has to face its own brand of skepticism, but from users rather than the audience. An Instagram feed is a

carefully curated narrative, and an onslaught of pictures of trash could dramatically disrupt that narrative.

“A girl at a school event once came up and told me she really wanted to pick up trash, and really wanted to contribute to

our database, but really didn’t want to post the picture on Instagram,” Kirscher said. He understands. So he encourages

people to create second accounts, ones which disregard the social component of Instagram and are entirely for the

benefits of data collection. (This writer, following suit, has created a second Instagram account for this exact purpose.)

But outside of the social component, it’s hard to find reasons to be skeptical of what Litterati is doing with data

collection of litter. Seasoned veterans of anti-litter campaigns across the country are excited about its potential, from

the California Coastal Commission to Keep America Beautiful to the National Resources Defense Council. What started

with a bright yellow bucket of kitty litter in Oakland is continually growing, one piece of litter, and one hashtagged

photo, at a time.

The revolution may not be tweeted, but it’s going to be hashtagged.

Economic study shows marine debris costs California residents millions of dollars

From NOAA, full text at https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/research/economic-study-shows-marine-debris-costs-

california-residents-millions-dollars

Marine debris found on Seal Beach, Orange County, California.

Marine debris shown as important characteristic

for beach-goers

Marine debris has many impacts on the ocean,

wildlife, and coastal communities. A NOAA

Marine Debris Program economic study released

today shows that it can also have considerable

economic costs to residents who use their local

beaches.

The study found that Orange County, California

residents lose millions of dollars each year

avoiding littered, local beaches in favor of

choosing cleaner beaches that are farther away

and may cost more to reach. Reducing marine

debris even by 25 percent at beaches in and near

Orange County could benefit residents roughly

$32 million during three months in the summer.

In order to better understand the economic cost

of marine debris on coastal communities, the

NOAA Marine Debris Program and Industrial

Economics, Inc. (IEc) designed a study that

examines how marine debris influences people’s decisions to go to the beach and what it may cost them. We

selected Orange County as a study location because beach recreation is an important part of the local culture

and residents have a wide variety of beaches from which to choose, some of which are likely to have high levels

of marine debris.

We found that:

Orange County residents are concerned about marine debris, and it significantly influences their

decisions to go to the beach. No marine debris on the beach and good water quality are the two most

important beach characteristics to them.

Avoiding littered beaches costs Orange County residents millions of dollars each year.

Reducing marine debris on beaches can prevent financial loss and provide economic benefits to

residents.

“This study shows that beachgoers are worried about marine debris and will seek out cleaner beaches for

recreation at a cost,” said Nancy Wallace, Marine Debris Program director. “Reducing or eliminating marine

debris from our beaches is critical, because littered shorelines are costing people more than we anticipated. We

can use these kinds of data to prioritize beaches for debris prevention and removal activities.”