Slashdot Mirror
California Votes To Ban Microbeads
New submitter Kristine Lofgren writes: The California Assembly just passed a vote to ban toxic microbeads, the tiny flecks found in toothpastes and exfoliants. Microbeads cause a range of problems, from clogging waterways to getting stuck in gums. The ban would be the strictest of its kind in the nation. As the article notes, the California Senate would need to pass a bill as well, for this ban to take effect, and if that happens, the resulting prohibition will come into place in 2020. From the article: Last year, Illinois became the first state in the U.S. to pass a ban on the usage of microbeads in cosmetics, approving a law that will go into effect in 2018, and earlier this year two congressmen introduced a bipartisan bill to outlaw the use of microbeads nationwide. And for exceptionally good reason; the beads, which serve as exfoliants and colorants are a massive source of water pollution, with scientists estimating that 471 million plastic microbeads are released into San Francisco Bay alone every single day.
I can't imagine it is really a big water treatment issue since they have a different density than water and you could separate them with settling tanks and skimmers.
And I don't see it matters for industry really because they'll just go back to using what they were using before which is mostly - sand.
You use this stuff as an abrasive and maybe the microbeads are mildly less abrasive? I don't know... anyway, they'll just replace this with very fine sand.
Thus - Meh.
Its a nothing issue either way.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
So how much pollution do 471million microbeads actually make?
Maybe they will ban tobacco next since it eventually kills most of the people using it. Oh, wait... they won't.
Why do corporations get a free pass to dump shit into people and the environment on a massive scale with no real oversight, yet we still improson people for growing the wrong plants.
471 million potatos is a lot of potatos. .2mm bits of plastic is enough to cover in plastic all of the living rooms in California.
471 million
Wait - no - one living room. Or about a dinner-plates worth a day.
Are the fish capable of digesting plastic? One would think that it would just pass through. It's hard to know whether or not to take the matter seriously, as (sadly) the average environmentalist has no idea what the definition of toxic is. One would think that if there were some interesting data the article would at least link it.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
Might not even need a law for it soon, what with the ongoing drought!
and must now pass the senate in order for it to go into effect as law on January 1, 2020.
Why wait so long for the law to take effect?
It's a little more than that. Studies have shown toxic pollutants bind to microbeads. Other studies have shown fish are eating the microbeads and absorbing the toxins. Humans eat fish. Microbeads are poisoning our food supply, and a number of governments are sponsoring studies to learn more about their impact.
Here's another article:
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/environmentalists-drawing-a-bead-on-microplastics
... FREEDOM!!!!
I mean Benghazi..... as my right wing 'friends' would say....
hi
There's concern for humans that eat those largest animals too.
so that make one more important concern.
Thanks
shaun
www.absdecorators.co.uk
We can get along fine without useless marketing crap.
The article doesn't support the statement that the microbeads are toxic.
Is there any information that the microbeads are actually toxic?
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Microbead manufacturers will reform and will start manufacturing non-toxic naturally dis-integrable microbead. The article should have clarified that 417 million microbeads are, assuming the diameter of microbead is 0.2 millimeter, less than 400 liters, or approximately 100 gallons.
Mindless pollution is wrong, no question about it.
However don't be surprised that in 2068 your grandchild will be arrested and will receive 12 month cryonic-freeze (an equivalent of 12 month jail time) because he/she violated 2018 law, by simply throwing away some garbage (which happened to have micro-particles, which were considered equivalent to micro beads)
I find it interesting that the article claims California's economy is the 7th in the world. Wow. I'm always hearing California politicians whining on the evening news about the state being almost bankrupt.
That's why I eat only organisms without a digestive tract.
I had these stupid microbeads in my hand-soap, and I found them really irritating.. I didn't know they were in it, and don't understand what they're supposed to do - other than be some sales-gimmick to paranoid "Soccer Moms". The less plastic we pump down the drain and into the environment - the better. Plastic is poisonous to wildlife and it always needs to be recycled, there's no such thing as a "healthy" level of plastic in the environment - unless it's "none". I can't even imagine this crap in toothpaste... wtf? Save the plankton!!!
I don't see the actual harm that microbeads are supposed to cause. If they are inert, they are effectively no different from sand. If they are not inert, they just harmlessly biodegrade into carbon dioxide and water.
See subject.
omg, panic!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
that's enough to almost fill an 8mm cube :/
Requiem for the American Dream
ugh its too hard to type what I was going to say
Eventually, everything finds something else to stick to and then the problem goes away. That is true for the planet as a whole obviously. So nano particles don't exist as such for very long.
If you want an exfoliant, what's wrong with sand?
Sand is a natural material, and the environment already knows how to deal with it.
Every time you get the urge to say "it's natural so it is OK" - REMEMBER CYANIDE.
Or Ebola. Or AIDS. Cancer too...
All perfectly natural.
Just like sulfuric acid - which is used to unclog pipes once they accumulate too much sand.
Or even "apricot shells and cocoa beans" suggested by the idiotic article.
Both of which soak up water, sink to the bottom and clog up pipes - calling for more perfectly natural chemicals to poured down the drain more often.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Doesn't that show the water isn't being cleaned well enough?
Are there not sands that are a fine enough grain that they can be used instead? That would at least mean we're putting something that is commonly found in the water back in it instead of plastic microbeads.
It seems to me the real problem is that apparently, improperly treated wastewater is being dumped. Regulating the use of microbeads will not solve that problem. At best, it will reduce one of the effects.
They're for getting petite girls to show you their little titties. XD