From Glitter to Car Tyres—How the EU is Trying to Fight Microplastics

Microplastics pose environmental and health risks globally, including in the Arctic. The EU aims to reduce microplastic releases by 30% by 2030, targeting both intentional and unintentional sources. Can it succeed?

Rising concern about microplastics

Over the last couple of years, there have been widespread concerns over the impact of microplastics on marine life, terrestrial ecosystems, and human health. Defined as plastic particles smaller than 5 millimetres, they originate from the degradation of larger plastic items, synthetic fibres from clothing, and the wear and tear of products like tires, paints, and cleaning agents. Microplastics are also intentionally added to products such as cosmetics.

Microplastics are also present in the Arctic environment. Some of these particles come from Arctic sources like decomposing fishing gear. However, they also arrive into the region with ocean currents and via air transport (for instance, polyester fibres and microscopic pieces of deteriorating tires), affecting not only marine, but also terrestrial ecosystems in the North. When we discuss Arctic microplastic pollution, we need to consider actions taking place in industrialized parts of the globe, of which Europe is geographically closest to the circumpolar North.

“Microplastics are also present in the Arctic environment.”

The concern about microplastic is clearly present among EU citizens as roughly nine in ten Europeans were worried about the environmental impact of microplastics in a 2020 Eurobarometer survey. The vision of artificial particles nesting in human intestines, muscles, placenta and testicles, apparently feels somewhat scary. This is the case even if current scientific understanding suggests that plastic particles are unlikely to cause major harm on their own, in contrast to toxins and pathogens that can take a ride on microplastics into our organisms.

Notwithstanding, both the World Health Organization and the European Commission’s scientific advisers have advocated precautionary approaches, especially as the releases into the environment are on the rise.

EU’s ambitious goals

The action on microplastics has thus become part of the EU’s European Green Deal strategy. Herein, the Zero Pollution Action Plan has set a rather ambitious target of reducing releases of microplastic particles into the environment at 30% by 2030.

Before microplastics became a new policy hype, the EU had already developed a broad set of instruments targeting plastic waste. For instance, within circular economy actions, in 2018, recycling targets for plastic packaging were increased. The 2007 Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation, a poster child of the EU’s environmental legislation, and Water Framework Directive have been enlisted to the fight against microplastics.

Glitter and cosmetics—banning intentional microplastics

In 2023, following the European Chemicals Agency’s (ECHA) advice, the European Commission adopted restrictions under REACH, which will gradually encompass groups of products such as cosmetics, cleaning agents, fertilizers, and pesticides. Suddenly, Europe’s fashion influencers discovered that loose plastic glitter—called by the Guardian “an environmental abomination” in 2020—would disappear from the stores. Microplastics in cosmetics will be gradually phased out by 2035.

ECHA hopes that these and other restrictions will prevent half a million tonnes of microplastics from entering the environment within the next 20 years, as today, around 145,000 tonnes of microplastics are annually added to products sold on the EU market, while 42,000 tonnes are released into the environment. Restrictions come at a cost, estimated for EU companies at EUR 19 billion.

Tyres and gym clothing—the challenge of unintentional microplastics

Intentionally added microplastics are actually a relatively low-hanging fruit for legislators. A bigger challenge is dealing with microplastics that are released unintentionally.

There have been over 70 different sources of such releases identified, including paints, plastic pellets, synthetic textiles and tyres. The European Commission estimated that over 600 Olympic-size swimming pools of polyester fibres, paint scraps and bits of tyres are injected into the environment within the EU annually. Each of us contributes to this joyful number when washing polyester gym clothes and hitting on the car breaks.

For unintentionally released microplastics, each type of product requires a specific approach, and easy solutions are few to be found. Microplastics in paints are reported under REACH. Tyre abrasion limits (limiting microplastic release) are part of the new EURO 7 Regulation, which will come into force in 2026.

“For unintentionally released microplastics, each type of product requires a specific approach, and easy solutions are few to be found.”

However, effective methods to test abrasion are yet to be developed. An unassuming proposal for a regulation to prevent plastic pellet losses to the environment, applicable to the whole value chain, can become one of the most impactful pieces of legislation.

It is yet to be seen if the new European Parliament and new European Commission, expected to further prioritize concerns over costs and competitiveness, will be able to take further steps necessary in the pursuit of the elusive 30% goal. A key, somewhat unspoken, challenge is that Europe is actually one of the largest producers of plastics globally, with the EU, UK and Switzerland being responsible for 17% of global production in 2020.

Not very visible Arctic

Within ICEBERG, we are obviously interested in how EU actions would impact the pollutants arriving into the Arctic from Europe. That is not necessarily a focus in Brussels, as the issue of long-range transport has been hardly visible in EU policymaking on microplastics.

However, for the Arctic communities, it is important to better understand the effects of policies in global industrialized centres on their lives. This understanding can encourage global action and drive community resilience. This is exactly the area where ICEBERG can contribute.

Adam Stepien

The author is a researcher from our partner organisation University of Lapland. He is also the co-leader of ICEBERG Work Package 3.

Disclaimer: The picture on this blog text has been produced with artificial intelligence.