the entire city of st. pete has implemented an ordinance banning plastic drinking straws. gina driscoll, vice chair of the st. petersburg city council, was one of the founders of the “no straw st. pete” campaign which ultimately led to the ban being passed in 2018. 

“it was never really just about plastic drinking straws,” driscoll said. “it was starting with that one simple object that grew into a bigger conversation about making better choices for the environment.”

an estimated 6300 million metric tons (mt) of plastic waste had been produced between 1950, when the large-scale production and use of the material began, and 2015, according to a study from that year. of that 6300 mt, a mere 9% has been recycled. another study showed that in 2010 alone, 275 mt of plastic was produced in 192 coastal countries. somewhere between 4.8 and 12.7 mt entered the ocean that same year. st. petersburg’s proximity to the florida gulf coast pins the municipality at the front of these issues. 

passionate about the environment and sustainability, driscoll wanted to figure out how st. petersburg could “lead the way” in getting rid of single-use plastics. during her first year on city council, driscoll came across an article about a ban on plastic straws in fort myers. 

“sometimes we find great ideas by looking at what other cities are doing,” driscoll said. 

this led to the formation of a campaign called “no straw st. pete,” which worked in collaboration with local organizations like “i love the burg” and suncoast rise against plastics coalition, even including the national bank ozk. businesses could pledge to go “straw free” and join the campaign, getting them a sticker on their door and more credit among environmentalists. by december 2018, the campaign had demonstrated that banning plastic straws could be viable. 

the suncoast rise against plastics (rap) coalition is composed of 17 institutions and environmental groups including tampa bay watch, st. petersburg audubon society, clearwater marine aquarium, and national groups like oceana. 

oceana field representative for the florida gulf coast, hunter miller, was involved with the st. petersburg straw ban from early on, meeting with the suncoast rap coalition and members of the st. petersburg city council. 

miller acknowledged that the coalition means more than just passing laws. volunteers work hard during beach clean ups and other events throughout the area, but the pollution problems still linger. 

“what we’ve found is, and what volunteers have found, is that those individual things are important, but they’re not going to get us to where we need to be,” miller said. “and that’s what really kind of brought the coalition together.” 

nevertheless, volunteers were a driving force behind this campaign, according to miller. after the “no straw st. pete” campaign started in early 2018, volunteers from the st. petersburg community went door-to-door to businesses to propose the straw ban and try to rally support. 

“it takes a village, really, when you want to get something ambitious done,” miller said. “but that strong volunteer legwork and people coming together is what it takes.” 

and businesses really were open to this idea of banning straws. miller said that a survey sent out to businesses after the ordinance was put in place showed “overwhelmingly positive” attitudes from businesses in response to the ordinance, and very few businesses in the st. petersburg area opposed it. 

according to driscoll, businesses were not forced to quit plastic straws cold turkey. there was a “phasing period” that started with straws being available by request only or in drive thrus. now, plastic drinking straws are not allowed anywhere in the city of st. pete, unless by special request due to medical conditions. 

kahwa coffee, a tampa bay coffee chain, is one business in st. petersburg that has been with this from the start in 2018. according to kahwa marketing associate natalie moore, the business is close to “i love the burg,” which is how they got on board with the “no straw st. pete” campaign. 

“we were one of the first to partner with them and start removing plastic straws from the company,” moore said. “also with the production of sippy lids, we kind of stray away from offering straws at all.” 

on behalf of the company as a whole, moore said that they have seen mostly positive attitudes from customers about the straw ban. 

“there always are people who don’t like it, but we do provide the alternative sippy lid so you don’t necessarily need a straw,” moore said. “but honestly, a lot of our customers are local and very involved with the community, and they’re completely on board with the no plastic straws.” 

additionally, kahwa has reusable plastic and metal straws available for sale.

there are 13 kahwa coffee locations across the tampa bay area, and even though straws are only legally banned in the st. petersburg locations, kahwa does not offer plastic straws at any of their locations, according to moore. 

that being said, if you go to a dunkin’ donuts in st. petersburg, you’ll likely be given a blue compostable straw instead of one made from plastic. but if you drive just ten minutes away to the neighboring city of gulfport, you’ll get a plastic straw from the same franchise. 

and that doesn’t just apply to dunkin’ donuts. gulfport also considered banning plastic straws the same time that st. petersburg did; but, the city council voted to table the consideration in 2018. similarly, st. pete beach, a separate township from the city of st. petersburg, lacks a ban on plastic straws. a lot of businesses in st. pete beach and all the beaches close-by do try to stay away from single-use plastic, but there is no law requiring them to do so. 

st. petersburg, gulfport, and st. pete beach are all in the same county. so at a county level, there are no laws against plastics. it’s at the smaller city level that some laws do exist. 

according to associate professor of marine science at eckerd college amy siuda, policy is one of the most impactful ways to reduce single-use plastic pollution. 

“having the codified (ordinance against plastic straws) is much more effective than just asking people to reduce their straw use,” siuda said. “because then it’s just not available. you can just remove those things from the system and people will find other ways to live without a plastic straw.” 

siuda has been at the college for six years and runs the tampa bay microplastics monitoring program with professor of biology and marine science shannon gowans. the program is a part of the larger tampa bay estuary program. 

siuda agrees that single-use plastics are something that can be avoided.

“single-use plastics are mostly unnecessary,” siuda said. “if we can reduce our single-use consumption, then we can reduce, hopefully, a lot of the harm that can be happening in the environment from plastics.” 

siuda and gowans’ monitoring research focuses mainly on microplastics and how these “invisible” plastics can be affecting all sorts of organisms. as a plankton ecologist, siuda has focused her attention on how these microorganisms, or copepods, are interacting with microplastics. gowans, a marine mammalogist, realized that a larger grazer is also being affected by plastics in the bay––manatees. 

while, according to siuda, the majority of plastics are coming from the land and not from river runoff, humans are not always the main transportation of these plastics. when terrestrial animals, like a squirrel for example, get ahold of these plastics while scavenging, they inevitably break those plastics down. 

“they’re dropping microplastics in the process of that, or breaking that thing down physically into smaller pieces that make it into the ocean as microplastics,” siuda said. “the big stuff is harmful to bigger organisms, but the little stuff is kind of harmful to everything.” 

siuda also added that larger plastics are capable of transporting invasive species across water systems, having serious negative impacts on ecosystems. 

this research and monitoring helps to buttress policies, and aids in educating others on the harms of single-use plastics and microplastics. according to siuda, education starts the process of getting support from people, which leads to policies. 

just by choosing not to take one plastic straw, consumers have the ability to limit the amount of single-use plastic going into the system. 

“i know it seems like one person can’t make a difference, but you have to start somewhere,” siuda said. 

the idea of starting somewhere small often leads to a larger-scale change. miller said that this is a driving force for systemic change. 

“what really brought people out to hit the pavement,” he said, “is the excitement to systematically address this problem through policy and knowing that the changes that they’re biting for locally are going to fuel the movement for bigger change at the state level, and the national level.”

––

editor’s note: this story is the first in the planet forward series “so long, single-use?” check back over the next several weeks for more stories about how communities and individuals can––and are––reducing single-use plastic waste.

while the perils of plastic pollution in our oceans and landfills are well-known, obstetricians have recently discovered a startling new development—the first evidence of microplastics have been found in human placentas.

the destructive nature of microplastics is no longer confined to ecological consequences; it permeates human health too.

the effects of plastic consumption remain poorly understood, as research is still in its infancy. however, early literature suggests several reasons for concern.  

synthetic microfibers, such as those from clothing, make up 14% of all global plastic production, according to a global study conducted in 2020. these fibers are especially harmful given the ease at which they break into smaller pieces—fragments so small, that they can be inhaled. the study suggests that inhalation of microfibers can cause localized toxicity in the body—thereby inducing or enhancing an immune response. chronic exposure to these fibers are anticipated to have the worst effects, given that the accumulation of chemicals such as bpa in the body have been shown to depress the immune system, trigger cancerous growths, prompt neurotoxicity, and disrupt the microbiome in the gut.

another emerging area of research on microplastics concerns the gut microbiome. the gut microbiome refers to all the microorganisms that live in the gastrointestinal tract; it’s essential for the function of mammals.

preliminary findings show that when microplastics interact with gastrointestinal microorganisms, it can increase the phagocytic activity of immune cells, impacting metabolism, immune function, and behavior.

worse still, nano plastics, the smallest of plastic particles, are small enough to pass through intestinal barriers, just like placental barriers. last year a study on nano plastics demonstrated they can cross the blood-brain barrier, causing brain damage in fish. 

the uncontained spread of plastics in our environment leaves everyone vulnerable. microplastics are now entering the terrestrial food web at alarming rates. particles in soil can be ingested at multiple stages of the food chain. scientists recently observed nano plastic transfer from soil to chickens via earthworms, raising concerns for human consumption. 

the microscopic size of these pollutants allows them to travel enormous distances. in a single day, some particles can travel up to 95km (59 miles). plastic will soon be on every inch of our planet; in fact, some were just found on the glaciers of the tibetan plateau.

even in remote locations, levels of microplastics are plentiful. in the french pyrenees mountains, microplastic fragments, fibers, and films were found at relatively high levels, despite the area being sparsely populated, and far from any industrial, commercial, or large agricultural activities.

in confronting the pervasive and universal threat of microplastics, our collective responsibility becomes increasingly evident. plastic is no longer just a marine issue; it has become a global challenge.

as we navigate the delicate implications of curbing plastic production, the role of the private sector will be a pivotal force in shaping the collective response. the symbiotic relationship between plastic production and cheap fossil fuel feedstock demands international intervention and a recalibration of industrial practices. 

as individuals, we can wield collective power by pressuring our policymakers to enforce industry change. today, sadly, industry change is the most effective way forward. because it doesn’t matter how many times i remember my reusable bags if the producers aren’t incentivized to ditch the plastic wrap covering every item i buy. 

as new research continues to demonstrate the detriments of plastics, it is only a matter of time before the evidence overwhelms policymakers to take action. 

navigating the anthropocene epoch is no easy task. perhaps plastics in our placentas will be just enough to move the needle this time around.

—

cate twining-ward is a senior correspondent at planet forward, a grand-prize winner of storyfest 2020, and a student at the george washington university.

sifting through the endless racks of new clothing, customers weave in and out of the maze of shelves at a local store. inexpensive sweaters, skirts and blouses are strewn everywhere, bunched up and tossed carelessly. employees scuttle about making crinkled clothes crisp with folds and restocking shelves.

for northwestern university juniors regina morfin and avantika raikar, this is the fast fashion challenge. morfin and raikar are the co-founders of lura, an online platform that provides small apparel brands with access to sustainable textiles such as recycled pet (one form of polyester fabric) and biodegradable nylon. the two met in 2018 through northwestern’s epic launch entrepreneurship program. after bonding over a mutual interest in sustainability and fashion, they began work on lura.

set to launch in early 2021, lura is a consulting service that connects small fashion brands with textile manufacturers. lura’s primary mission is to make sustainability more accessible. the fashion industry “functions in a really outdated way,” morfin said, and without the right connections, sourcing and producing sustainable clothing is difficult.

companies can peruse eco-conscious fabrics on lura’s website, selecting ones that match specific sustainability and style goals, such as water conservation during manufacture or active wear. they can also schedule one-on-one consultations with morfin and raikar to discuss potential designs, price range, textures, and colors. lura will then send textile samples and either connect companies with the appropriate manufacturers or places a textile order for them. lura’s manufacturers hail from all over the world the company charges a $30 monthly subscription fee for its services, with the first two months free.

for newer, smaller apparel brands, finding  and establishing connections with textile hegemons is even more challenging. morfin and raikar sympathize with these brands, citing the lack of industry connections as the “hardest thing.” to build their current connections, the lura founders spent hours researching, emailing and calling people, searching hashtags such as “eco-conscious” on social media and compiling information.  

“it’s about giving these small businesses accessibility to these textiles that they might not have heard of or might not have found otherwise,” morfin said. “and empowering them to be sustainable and be proud of it.”

synthetic materials used in fast fashion clothing, such as polyester and nylon, are not biodegradable and are filled with unsustainable forms of plastic. they compose 60% of clothing worldwide. polyester manufacture uses large amounts of water and emits 14.1 pounds of carbon dioxide per pound produced. making nylon creates nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas far more more potent than carbon dioxide. although relatively small amounts are released, it traps 200 to 300 times more heat than carbon dioxide and depletes the ozone layer, reducing the protection offered from harmful uv sun rays.

because they are not biodegradable, these synthetic materials break down into microfibers that are released into the air, wastewater systems and oceans. according to a report by friends of the earth, washing one load of synthetic clothes releases millions of microplastics into the wastewater system. each year, one person produces 793 pounds of microfibers.

sasha adkins, an ecologist at loyola university chicago, points to fast fashion as one of the “biggest culprits” of microfiber pollution. due to their microscopic size, microfibers are easily ingested by both animals and humans. the average person, adkins said, consumes a credit card’s worth of plastic every week. 

“it’s just common sense that that’s not healthy, right?” they said. “you don’t want to eat pieces of your polyester sweater.”

microfibers, and plastics in general, attract organic pollutants and absorb toxic chemicals from detergents and fire retardant chemicals in waste systems. as they travel through water ways and in the air, they eventually become trapped in colder regions such as the arctic because they cannot remetabolize into the air.

“these chemicals are being released with climate change, as ice and snow are melting and the arctic gets warmer. and they’re traveling around the planet again,” adkins explained. “they’re sticking to (other) plastic. we’re eating the plastic. so we’re also eating all these contaminants in a concentrated form.”

according to haley boyd, a sustainable fashion expert, the fashion industry can greatly reduce microfiber production with greater regulation from the federal trade commission. although the federal trade commission has definitions of “sustainable” and “biodegradable,” they are not specific or consistent enough, granting brands too much flexibility on what is sustainable and what is not. for one brand, sustainability may mean incorporating textiles such as linen in its fast fashion business model. for another, it may mean using 100% organic cotton in all products. 

additionally, brands must obtain third party certifications to claim that a material is, for instance, biodegradable. however, the hundreds of organizations that have the same certification all have different standards for “biodegradable.”

morfin also expressed concerns about  third party certifications, which she and avantikar rely on extensively. “there’s so much we wish we could do about checking if everything is truly sustainable,” she said. “and covid made it worse too because we even wanted to travel to these places and see them for ourselves, but we kinda just have to rely on people’s word, people’s statistics. hopefully they’re not skewed in any way.”

one example is recycled plastic. companies such as the girlfriend collective produce clothing made from recycled water bottles. one pair of leggings uses 25 water bottles, preventing 18.61 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions and saving 3.11 gallons of water.

although girlfriend collective uses 100% post-consumer water bottles, some companies do not meet this standard. the lack of regulation and information, boyd said, misleads designers and manufacturers into thinking their sustainability efforts are positively affecting the planet. because recycled plastic textiles have become increasingly popular, the supply of post-consumer recycled bottles is inadequate because not enough bottles get recycled. manufacturers then must make virgin plastic bottles that have no other purpose than to be sold to a company that wants to say they are making textiles out of recycled plastic, according to boyd. 

“recycled plastic is a band-aid; it’s not a solution.” boyd warned. “you are putting off the inevitability of plastic reaching a dead end a few years later than it would have otherwise. someone’s gonna buy those leggings for a hundred bucks, wear them for a couple years, and then they’re gonna go to a landfill. if the plastic bottle had just been landfilled, how’s that differ than reusing that product one more time?”

morfin, meanwhile, thinks that recycled plastic fabric such as polyester (pet) can be a step in the right direction. “at the end of the day, we don’t want to shame anyone.” she said. “if a brand feels like recycled pet is the way that they can make a difference, it does help.”

for kristy drutman, creator and founder of brown girl green, the most pressing issue in sustainable fashion is the threat of greenwashing. seeing the prospect of sustainable fashion, some companies deceptively market themselves as “eco-friendly;” in reality, they have tenuous connections to responsible sourcing or production. “many companies don’t have transparent practices around material sourcing or paying their workers/ producers a living wage,” drutman added. “yet, they’ll push for things like ‘recycled’ or ‘upcycled’ materials, and make money off of that marketing, rather than actually cleaning up their practices.”

the best way to reduce microfiber production, adkins, boyd and drutman agreed, is shopping at second-hand stores. sustainable fashion brands can often be expensive, demanding upwards of $100 for a single shirt.

although second-hand clothing still produces microfibers, they do not fuel the sourcing of new synthetic materials. clothing subscriptions or rental services is another sustainable alternative.

for adkins, fast fashion is rooted in a “narcissistic mentality that mainstream culture promotes.” because fast fashion clothing is cheap, flimsy and trendy, people often buy and dispose of it quickly. 

“if something’s ripped, you can repair it.” they said. “we don’t have that mentality anymore. i think that it’s a cultural issue about the status and prestige people get from keeping up with trends and looking a certain way, valuing that over justice.”

boyd also cautioned that fast fashion’s low cost is deceptive, as it does not quantify the environmental or ethical costs. over the last 60 years, the price of apparel has not risen at the same rate of other consumer goods, and boyd cited sweatshops as one of the greatest factors. 

“it’s because we aren’t paying people a fair wage in developing countries to make clothes, and we should be paying more per item, and we should be buying less.” she said. “and that’s really a hard thing for people to accept.”

adkins and boyd both urge consumers to consider the complete life cycle of a garment, hoping to shift attention away from solely microfiber shedding. tracing a garment’s life cycle — its initial production, consumption, and post-consumption status — is essential when assessing its true sustainability. moreover, working conditions, exploitation, fair trade and animal welfare intersect with sustainability, and are crucial in quantifying a garment’s environmental and social impacts.

“it’s not about what it does to you as a consumer. it’s about what it does during its life cycle.” adkins said. “you have to think about the people and the rest of the planet. the workers who make it and the people who have to deal with it when you throw it away. we need to rethink disposable culture.” 

“is everything of plastic? almost, ” a video advertisement for the futuristic dream house boasts. 

we are past that future now. so where is the house?

well, depending on the type of plastic, pieces of the house may have ended up in different places around the world. since plastics can take anywhere from 20 to 500 years to break down, elements of the house are likely still somewhere on this planet, negatively affecting animals and plants alike, and likely ending up on our plates.

microplastics have been found everywhere, and are now thought to be ubiquitous in the environment.

microfibers from house of the future’s synthetic fabrics could be falling out of the sky with snow and rain. microplastics have now been found to undergo transportation via the atmosphere and be deposited back down to earth.

some of the synthetic materials, once weathered into smaller pieces by other forces could easily be ingested by all sorts of wildlife, especially since research shows that plastics immersed in ocean water emit a chemical signal that seabirds smell and easily mistake for their other sources of food.

some of the more dense plastics from the house might more easily sink in aquatic environments, like this high-density polyethylene bucket at the bottom of the ocean.

even if the entirety of monsanto’s house of the future was properly disposed of in a landfill, it could still be wreaking havoc on the environment. landfills have been found to leach chemicals and have the potential to contaminate groundwater sources. or, like the scene shown in this photo, the elements can weather away at the manmade features and eventually wash them out to sea.

how can we change?

while we cannot undo the creation of the house of the future, all of us can pursue actionable everyday steps to help curb the deleterious effects of plastic on our environment and its inhabitants.

• before you buy something made of plastic or packaged in it, try to find a secondhand or zero waste alternative to it. always have your bottle or mug on you and think ahead for food or snacks so that you don’t catch yourself in a pinch having to purchase plastic-wrapped food.   
• contact companies you support about reducing their plastic footprint. this handy guide walks you through how to go about contacting businesses—complete with a script!
• if contacting businesses is not up your alley, call them out on social media about excessive packaging. outreach is key to solving the plastics problem
• contact your representatives and urge them to support the break free from plastic pollution act of 2020.

1. shopping at zero-waste stores. check out this zero-waste grocery shopping guide as a place to start.

2. bringing your reusables. it’s all about making it a habit. bring your own bags to the grocery store, bring your own cups to coffee shops, and always keep your reusable utensils and straws on you.

3. buying sustainable alternatives to your everyday products. shampoo and conditioner bars and bamboo toothbrushes are just a few items that you can purchase to make your everyday activities more sustainable.

for an extended list of what you can do, check out the reduce single-use at eckerd college’s website’s “how to help” section.

sources for the video:
the ocean conservancy

united nations environment

1. sun protection

sun protection is an essential element for any happy day in the sand. yet, those empty plastic sunscreen bottles really add up when you reapply every couple hours. fortunately, you don’t have to trade in your own health for the planet’s. instead, look for sunblock packaged in recyclable and re-purpose-able metal tins or glass jars. there are even some spf options with entirely biodegradable packaging, such as eir nyc’s surf mud pro.

2. snacks

after hours in the waves, you’re sure to work up an appetite. as you pack up snacks in preparation for your trip, phase out single-use plastic wrap and zipper bags for biodegradable food wrap or reusable zipper bags, perfect for sandwiches or summer produce. 

don’t worry about filling up your cooler with plastic water bottles. instead, pack your beverage of choice in a temperature regulating reusable bottle, like those from hydro flask or s’well, that keeps liquids cool as the weather gets hot.

3. swimwear

after a long winter, you might find that last summer’s swimsuit is worn out or doesn’t fit quite like it used to. if it’s time for a new suit, consider investing in one made from recycled nylon from patagonia or reformation or one made using discarded plastic bottles from madewell. take the time to find one that’s just right. a swimsuit that spends only one summer on your body will still spend centuries or more in a landfill. 

swimsuits aren’t the only piece of beach gear being made from repurposed materials. nomadix towels are made using recycled plastic bottles and are perfect for the beach, pool, or yoga.

4. summer reading

there’s nothing better than kicking back on the beach with a good book. if you’re in need of something to read, try stopping by your local library, thrift shop, or used book store before checking out on amazon. yes, it may require you to do a little searching, but you will cut out shipping waste and you might surprise yourself with a new favorite author!

eckerd college student researchers share why our oceans are such a vital part of our environment, and why it is important to keep our oceans plastic-free. shannon grace-day, a research assistant at eckerd college discusses the microplastics found in manatee specimens from tampa bay and how critical the situation is becoming.

funding for the research behind this project was provided by the tampa bay environmental restoration fund.

but it didn’t take long for reality to sink in. plastics were polluters. there was nothing safe about them. the material, which takes years to decompose in the natural world, releases toxic gasses when it does. it produces toxic gasses when it is created. the pieces not properly taken care of are choked on by wildlife.

since these realizations, companies have taken strides to squash their plastic use. consumers are swapping single-use items for sustainable, long lasting products. it has become a noticeable plight, and now, a campaign issue. however, there is one innovation that is still needed. transparency. plastics have become so ingrained in our daily lives that it is hard to tell what has plastic and what does not. we are still living in a plastic dream world — we just don’t always know it. the enemy can hide in plain sight.

this project was based around the idea of exposing hidden plastics. by taking the bottom of a plastic water bottle and taping it over the camera lens, we can no longer see these products without seeing the material hidden inside. the plastic is clearly visible. it seems dreamlike, possibly euphoric, but there is also something deeply unsettling underneath. by making our plastic use more transparent, we can make our lives more sustainable. we just need to know where it is.

single-use items are designed to be used for minutes and will still be on the planet for hundreds of years to come. each and every single piece of plastic that has ever been produced is still on this planet here today. plastic in the ocean chokes, entangles, poisons, and or starves wildlife and marine birds. humans are not immune to the chemicals found in plastic and the toxins that they may collect over time either. harmful toxins have been found to seep into our foods and drinks which are stored in plastic containers.

we are ready and willing to make positive changes in order to generate less plastic waste. businesses and manufacturers should offer consumers more sustainable packaging and products. in addition, they should take responsibility for the plastic waste that they create during business operations. we as single human beings have the power to create massive waves of change, even more so when people with the common goal of reducing plastic come together.

a quote from the zero waste chef, anne maroe bonneau, that has helped me through my zero-waste journey is, “we don’t need a handful of people doing zero waste perfectly. we need millions of people doing it imperfectly.”

—

art installation created by anna lindquist.

video created by angelique herring.