They’re hidden in your clothes, your soaps and even your toothpaste. Microbeads — tiny plastic particles — are part of most common personal care products.
They wash down the drain and are too small to be filtered by traditional waste treatment plants, so they are released directly into the water and pollute the ecosystem.
Ottawa Riverkeeper and a team of other conservation groups have worked together to raise awareness about the issue, and now the Liberal government is asking for public input in drafting a new bill to curb the microbead problem.
Microbeads are tiny polymer particles commonly found in body wash, toothpaste and facial scrubs that are labeled on the bottle as polyethylene or polypropylene. There are up to 2.8 million microbeads within the average 150-millilitre bottle, say a 2015 report from Environment Canada.
In May 2015, Liberal MP John McKay introduced a private members bill that would ban microbeads in personal care products.
“We didn’t get much of a debate,” McKay says.
In a voluntary survey of its members conducted by the Canadian Cosmetics,Toiletry and Fragrance Association, the total estimated volume of microbeads used per consumer ranged from 30 kilograms to 68, 000 kg annually.
Microbeads have conservation groups worried because, “they’re really piling up at unbelievable rates in our ocean,” says Ottawa Riverkeeper, Meredith Brown.
McKay recognizes the urgency of the problem.
“The oceans, the lakes and the rivers are only so resilient,” he says.
According to the Environment Canada report, there were about 5.25 trillion plastic particles floating around the oceans in July, weighing nearly 270, 000 tonnes.
But apparently the tiny beads serve no significant purpose in the products in which they’re ingredients. “It’s frivolous and at the same time quite harmful,” says Brown.
Cosmetic companies use microbeads as a cheaper alternative instead of natural exfoliants like apricot shells or sugar. Environment Canada estimates that the cost for alternative exfoliants would be two to three times greater than the cost of plastic microbeads.
Microbeads are harmful to the growth of aquatic species who consume them, says Environment Canada.
They enter the food chain and end up just about in anything. Brown was shocked by studies that reported on high levels of microbeads in beer.
“I’m sure if they did the same thing with water they might find the same thing,” she says.
Water filtration systems used for both bottled and tap water aren’t effective at removing microbeads from water.
“This is an environmental problem that has a clear solution,” says McKay.
At a public consultation on Feb. 22 in Gatineau, members of Environment and Climate Change Canada discussed the problem and sought stakeholder input.
McKay says that the larger issue is that “we need to get on top of our toxins.”
The new regulations would come into force in December 2017, beginning with restrictions on manufacturers.
“We might actually get something done here,” says McKay.
But conservation groups aren’t impressed with all of the new proposals.
“There’s a few surprises for us,” says Brown.
The proposal only bans microbeads smaller than two millimetres in size, which Brown says isn’t enough.
Brown says she thinks cosmetic companies are pushing for a similar ban to the limited one that is happening in the U.S. to make it easier for production.
Ottawa environmental law charity, Ecojustice is happier with the new regulations. Pierre Sadik, the group’s manager of legislative affairs, says that companies don’t typically use microbeads that are more than two millimetres anyways.
Brown says scientists are currently in the process analyzing water samples from the Ottawa River to determine the extent of local pollution.
“We know they’re in the Ottawa River, we just don’t have proof.”
The public is invited to submit comments to Environment and Climate Change Canada up until March 10.