No abstract

Reference materials (RMs) are vital tools in the validation of methods used to detect environmental pollutants. Microplastics, a relatively new environmental pollutant, require a variety of complex approaches to address their presence in environmental samples. Both interlaboratory comparison (ILC) studies and RMs are essential to support the validation of methods used in microplastic analysis. Presented here are results of quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) performed on two types of candidate microplastic RMs: dissolvable gelatin capsules and soda tablets. These RMs have been used to support numerous international ILC studies in recent years (2019–2022). Dissolvable capsules containing polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyethylene (PE), and polystyrene (PS), in different size fractions from 50 to 1000 µm, were produced for one ILC study, obtaining relative standard deviation (RSD) from 0 to 24%. The larger size fraction allowed for manual addition of particles to the capsules, yielding 0% error and 100% recovery during QA/QC. Dissolvable capsules were replaced by soda tablets in subsequent ILC studies and recovery test exercises because they were found to be a more reliable carrier for microplastic RMs. Batches of soda tablets were produced containing different single and multiple polymer mixtures, i.e., PE, PET, PS, PVC, polypropylene (PP), and polycarbonate (PC), with RSD ranging from 8 to 21%. Lastly, soda tablets consisting of a mixture of PE, PVC, and PS (125–355 µm) were produced and used for recovery testing during pretreatment of environmental samples. These had an RSD of 9%. Results showed that soda tablets and capsules containing microplastics >50 µm could be produced with sufficient precision for internal recovery tests and external ILC studies. Further work is required to optimize this method for smaller microplastics (< 50 µm) because variation was found to be too large during QA/QC. Nevertheless, this approach represents a valuable solution addressing many of the challenges associated with validating microplastic analytical methods.

No abstract

Microplastic is now ubiquitous in freshwater, sediment and biota, globally. This is as a consequence of inputs from, for example, waste mismanagement, effluents from wastewater treatment plants and surface runoff from agricultural areas. In this study, we investigated point source pollution of plastic to an upland stream, originating from a recycling plant that recycles polyethylene film in a remote area of Norway. Sediment (~2 kg) and macroinvertebrates (549 individuals in total) were sampled at one site upstream and two sites downstream of the recycling plant to study microplastic deposition and food web uptake. In total, 340 microplastic films were identified through a combination of visual and µFTIR analysis in the sediment samples. This corresponded to a concentration of 0.23 (± 0.057) items per g sediment upstream of the plastic recycling plant and 0.45 (± 0.017) and 0.58 (± 0.34) items per g downstream. The dominant plastic polymer was polyethylene, which increased significantly downstream of the plastic recycling plant. This indicates the role of the plastic recycling plant as a point source for microplastic in this catchment. Among the three sites investigated, a fairly constant concentration of polypropylene was found, indicating a diffuse source of polypropylene films across the catchment possibly relating to low-intensity agricultural land-use. Low levels of polyethylene were also observed upstream, which may be linked to either local or longer-distance atmospheric transport. Despite the considerable presence of microplastic in sediments, concentrations in macroinvertebrates were extremely low with only a single microplastic particle identified in the total of 549 macroinvertebrates—belonging to three different feeding groups—investigated. Our study suggests that: 1) microplastic pollution can be transferred to remote areas as unintended losses from recycling facilities, 2) remote areas with limited land-use pressure still have detectable levels of microplastic and 3) microplastic is only taken up by stream macroinvertebrates to a limited degree despite relatively high sediment concentrations, and thus there are no strong indications for ecological risks posed by microplastic to this ecological group at this location.

The removal of microplastic from wastewater collected from a plastic recycling facility was investigated, using a laboratory scale sand-filter. Wastewater samples were collected before and after the onsite sand-filter, for characterization for different polymer types, sizes, and shapes. A considerable difference in the characteristics and concentrations of microplastics was observed before and after onsite sand-filtration, demonstrating differences in the source of microplastics and/or potential contamination of the sand-filter operated at the facility. The distribution of different polymers showed polyethylene and polypropylene to be the main microplastics present in the wastewater samples. In the next stage, the samples were passed through a laboratory scale sand-filter column, to investigate the removal of microplastics. The laboratory scale sand-filter showed high efficiency (up to 100%) in removing microplastics of all polymer types, shapes, and sizes, demonstrating the effectiveness of this well-developed, and widely adopted, method for the removal of microplastics from wastewater. As the green shift and circular economy will result in more plastics being recycled, this study demonstrates the need for quantification of microplastic in effluents from plastic recycling facilities. This is important for devising appropriate microplastic removal strategies, and meeting potential discharge regulations that may come into effect in the future.