FAQ

Here You Will Find Answers to Frequently Asked Questions

About BIOMERE

What are Biomere?

Biomers are biodegradable lipids, i.e. hydrophilic natural waxes. Biomers are the microplastic-free and biodegradable substitute for polymer additives.
Biomers offer perfect surface properties equivalent to those of polymer additives, such as UV and temperature resistance, chemical and mechanical resistance. The biodegradability, desired property and melting range are also specified by the user and adapted to the requirements of the end product.

The shelf life of BIOMERE is guaranteed for at least 12 months in dry containers as granules, prills, powder or as micronisate.

For which industries are biomers suitable?

BIOMERE not only enable environmentally conscious action, but also a custom-fit application. Both biodegradability, different delivery forms, corresponding surface properties, degree of hardness, chemical and UV resistance, scratch and abrasion resistance, dynamic viscosity, adhesion, crosslinking and flexibility can be selected according to the needs of the respective industry and thus the right biomer for the specific application can be found.

For example, BIOMERE can be used as additives for dispersion binders in paints and coatings to provide a film-binding function. In cleaning and care products, biomers can be used as abrasive particles or opacifiers. Biomers offer improved sewability, abrasion resistance and cuttability in the manufacture of textiles. A detailed description of the functions and many different applications can be found here.

More about

What are ecological reasons for using Biomere?

Unlike conventional polymeric additives, biomers are free of microplastics and biodegrade in the aquatic environment.

Just like polymers, Biomere can be used as binders, emulsifiers, flocculants or for temperature control. Biomere ensure the same surface properties of the application as the polymeric additives.
A major ecological factor of biomers is their biodegradability. The main advantage here is that an individual time period for biodegradability can be selected and adapted to the requirements of the end product. Thus, the speed of biodegradability can be individually specified for the life cycle of the respective end product. A shelf life of at least twelve months is guaranteed for the biomers in dry containers as granules, prills, powder or as micronisate. Biomere are lipids, i.e. hydrophilic natural waxes, and accordingly do not represent an additional burden for the environment.

What are the advantages of biomers?

The BIOMERE® brand stands for biodegradable waxes.

* Free of microplastics

* Biodegradability certified according to official DIN standards.

* Individual period of biodegradability specified by the user and adapted to the requirements of the end product.

* Durable quality product, which meet the well-known quality standards of DEUREX AG.

* Identical properties to polymeric additives and can perform identical functions to polymeric additives.

* Shelf life of BIOMERE is guaranteed for at least 12 months in dry container as granules, prills, powder or as micronisate.

General

How exactly are polymers defined?

We know polymers under the names "PA (polyamides), PC (polycarbonates), PE (polyethylenes), PEEK (polyether ether ketones), PET (polyethylene terephthalate), PHA (polyhydroxyalkanoates), PLA (polylactic acid), PMMA (polymethyl metharyclate), PP (polypropylenes), PU (polyurethanes) (Federal Environment Agency, 2015).

Legislators in the EU are guided by the Reach definition (Article 3(5)):

"(...) ein Polymer ist definiert als ein Stoff, der die folgenden Kriterien erfüllt (ECHA 2012)8:
(a) Over 50 percent of the weight for that substance consists of polymer molecules (see definition below); and,
(b) The amount of polymer molecules presenting the same molecular weight must be less than 50 weight percent of the substance.

In the context of this definition:
– A „polymer molecule“ is a molecule that contains a sequence of at least 3 monomer units, which are covalently bound to at least one other monomer unit or other reactant.
– A „monomer unit“ means the reacted form of a monomer substance in a polymer (for the identification of the monomeric unit(s) in the chemical structure of the polymer the mechanism of polymer formation may, for instance, be taken into consideration).
– A „sequence“ is a continuous string of monomer units within the molecule that are covalently bonded to one another and are uninterrupted by units other than monomer units. This continuous string of monomer units can possibly follow any network within the polymer structure.
– „Other reactant“ refers to a molecule that can be linked to one or more sequences of monomer units but which cannot be regarded as a monomer under the relevant reaction conditions used for the polymer formation process.

What exactly is microplastic?

Microplastics are solid, insoluble, particulate, and non-biodegradable
synthetic polymers. There is currently no uniform and internationally recognized definition of microplastics (Hartmann et al. 2019).
Mikroplastik gibt es derzeit noch nicht (Hartmann et al. 2019).

One often speaks of microplastics when particles, fragments or fibers are smaller than 1 mm (Hartmann et al. 2019, Anger & von der Esch et al. 2018, Braun et al. 2018). This microplastic is usually no longer visible to the naked eye. Large microplastics are defined as particles between 5 and 1mm (Braun et al. 2018).
Fasern kleiner als 1 mm sind (Hartmann et al. 2019, Anger & von der Esch et al. 2018, Braun et al. 2018). Dieses Mikroplastik ist mit bloßen Auge meist nicht mehr zu erkennen. Großes Mikroplastik wird definiert als Partikel zwischen 5 und 1mm (Braun et al. 2018).

The definition with which the EU works reads in the original as follows (DG Environment (2017), S. 12f.):

Microplastics consist of man-made, conventional plastics.
Microplastics also include bio-degradable plastics, bio-based analogue plastics, and biobased alternative plastics.
Microplastics are solid and water-insoluble particles.
Microplastics have particle size below 5 mm and include nanometer sized plastics as well
(nanoparticles).

How is microplastic created?

According to their formation, a distinction is made between primary and secondary microplastics.

Primary microplastic

Primary microplastics type A, which can be found as particles in, for example, household cleaners.
or cosmetics, for example, are produced industrially in a targeted manner. The particles are already in the size range of microplastics when they enter the environment. This type A can be used in the form of spherical microplastics, so-called microbeads, or as sharp-edged particles, e.g. abrasives in scouring agents or exfoliants.
bereits bei Eintritt in die Umwelt im Größenbereich von Mikroplastik. Dieser Typ A kann in Form von kugelrundem Mikroplastik, sogenannte Microbeads, oder als scharfkantige Partikel, z.B. Schleifmittel in Scheuermitteln oder Peelings eingesetzt werden.

Pellets or granules used as feedstock for the industrial production of plastic parts and films are also primary microplastics (e.g. in injection molding processes or film extrusion).
Kunststoffteilen und -folien verwendet werden, sind ebenfalls primäres Mikroplastik (z.B. bei Spritzgussverfahren oder bei der Extrusion von Folien).

Primary microplastics type B are formed during the use phase of a product. One example is fibers from synthetic textiles, which come off during washing and end up in wastewater (Ivleva et al. 2017, Wendt-Potthoff et al. 2017). The use of many plastic products generates abrasion, which is also referred to as primary type B microplastics. Examples include the abrasion of car tires and bitumen in asphalt, defenses of sports fields and playgrounds, abrasion of shoe soles, and the release of particles at construction sites, which lead to further microplastics in the environment (Bertling et al. 2018).

Secondary Microplastics

Secondary microplastics are fragments that are first formed in the environment from larger plastic parts. Mechanical, chemical or biological processes play a major role in their decomposition. UV radiation, which makes plastics brittle and thus fragile, plays a significant role.

Where is microplastic found?

Microplastics in the Environment

Microplastics are now present in almost all areas of the environment. Microplastics have been detected in more and more waters worldwide in recent years. Both larger plastic waste and microplastics can be found in the deep sea, as well as on beaches of uninhabited and remote islands (Bergmann et al. 2017b, Imhof et al. 2017).
Microplastics have also been found in freshwater, rivers and lakes (among others, Imhof et al. 2013). A recent study by the University of Bayreuth detected microplastics in the water surface of all investigated rivers and lakes in South and South-West Germany (Schwaiger 2019, Hess et al. 2018).

It is suspected that microplastics occur almost everywhere (Hurley et al. 2020, Liu, L.-Y. et al. 2020, Möller et al. 2020). Microplastics have also been detected on agricultural land (Huang et al. 2020) and in fertilizers and compost (Zhang, L. et al. 2020, Weithmann et al. 2018). Atmospheric transport also brings the small particles to more remote locations on Earth (e.g., Arctic lake ice, Alpine glaciers, Bergmann et al. 2019, Zhang, Y. et al. 2019, Bergmann et al. 2017a).

Microplastics are ingested by a wide variety of organisms, for example, all types of fish, reptiles, birds, aquatic invertebrates, cetaceans, and other marine mammals (ECHA (2019), p.8), and thus become part of our food chain.
It is also suspected that the number of microplastics in the environment increases sharply as the size of individual particles decreases (e.g., Imhof et al. 2016, Enders et al. 2015).

Microplastic in Everyday Life

Microplastic particles are in everyday objects. In many cosmetic products, for example in toothpaste or shower gel, these are used as abrasives, among other things. Not only for packaging, but also in food itself microplastics are used, be it for the smoothness of the texture or the longer shelf life.

Basically, it can be stated that microplastics are ubiquitous. Even in the air, in addition to natural particles such as pollen, fungal spores, and Saharan dust, there are man-made particles such as dust, soot, and microplastics (Abbasi et al. 2019, Klein et al. 2019, Liu, C. et al. 2019, Verla et al. 2019, Catarino et al. 2018, Gasperi et al. 2018, Dris et al. 2017). Thus, humans inevitably come into contact with microplastics in their daily lives.

What is Bio-Plastic?

Bioplastic according to the IUPAC definition (IUPAC, 2012).

"Biobased polymer derived from biomass, or monomers derived from biomass, which at some stage of its processing into finished products, can be formed by flow." 

So-called bioplastics are generally used as a counter term to polymers produced from fossil raw materials. However, the term bioplastic is often misleading because not every polymer derived from biomass is environmentally friendly and actually biodegradable. In addition, the use of the term "biobased polymer" instead of "bioplastic" is recommended.

Examples of bioplastic designations include polylactic acid (PLA), polycaprolactone (PCL), and a variety of polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA).

Environmental and Health Concerns

How do microplastics enter our environment?

Microplastic Pathways

Microplastics enter the environment through many different processes. Through the improper disposal of plastic waste, so-called secondary microplastic particles are created, which account for the majority of microplastics in the environment. Furthermore, industrially produced primary microplastics (e.g. pellets, microbeads, abrasive particles) also enter the environment. A relatively unknown cause of microplastics in the environment is that most plastic products release particles during their particles through abrasion during use, and thus more and more microplastics are being detected in the terrestrial environment as well.
unsachgemäße Entsorgung von Kunststoffmüll entstehen die sogenannten sekundären Mikroplastikpartikel, welche den Großteil des Mikroplastiks in der Umwelt ausmachen. Weiterhin gelangt auch industriell hergestelltes primäres Mikroplastik (z.B. Pellets, Microbeads, Schleifpartikel) in die Umwelt. Eine relativ unbekannte Ursache für Mikroplastik in der Umwelt ist, dass die meisten Kunststoffprodukte während ihrer
Benutzung durch Abrieb Partikel abgeben und somit auch in der terrestrischen Umwelt mehr und mehr Mikroplastik nachgewiesen wird.

When looking at the production and sales figures of products from which microplastics can be generated, the path of microplastics into the environment clearly emerges. This includes the abrasion of plastic products that occurs during their life cycle. Tires, bitumen in asphalt, sports and playground surfaces, shoe soles, surfaces of boats or house facades (paints, coatings), construction sites are examples of this (Bertling et al. 2018). Just like synthetic fibers generated from washing clothes, this abrasion enters the environment through wastewater and combined sewer overflows (Bertling et al. 2018, Miklos et al. 2016, Essel et al. 2015). While a large proportion of plastics can be removed by modern wastewater treatment, by no means all of them can.
Mikroplastik entstehen kann, zeichnet sich der Weg von Mikroplastik in die Umwelt
deutlich ab. Dazu gehört der Abrieb von Kunststoffprodukten der während ihrer
Lebensphase entsteht. Reifen, Bitumen im Asphalt, Sport- und Spielplätze,
Schuhsohlen, Oberflächen von Booten oder Häuserfassaden (Lacke, Beschichtungen), Baustellen sind hierfür beispielhaft zu nennen (Bertling et al. 2018). Genau wie synthetische Fasern, die beim Waschen von Kleidung entstehen, gelangt dieser Abrieb durch Abwässer und Mischwasserentlastungen in die Umwelt (Bertling et al. 2018, Miklos et al. 2016, Essel et al. 2015). Zwar kann ein Großteil der Kunststoffe durch die moderne Abwasserreinigung entfernt werden, bei weitem aber nicht alle.

It is little known that a comparable input also occurs in terrestrial ecosystems, although the methodological difficulties in detecting microplastics here are enormous (Hurley et al. 2020, Liu, L.-Y. et al. 2020, Möller et al. 2020). Potential input pathways here include organic fertilizers from biowaste fermentation, composting, and sewage sludge (Zhang, L. et al. 2020, Weithmann et al. 2018), agricultural use of plastics (especially films, Huang et al. 2020), or soil conditioners, including particles and fibers that are transported into the atmosphere due to their low weight and thus reach remote regions (Bergmann et al. 2019, Zhang, Y. et al. 2019). These include, for example, deposition on alpine glaciers (Ambrosini et al. 2019) or Arctic ice (Bergmann et al. 2017a).

Difficulty of Detection

Due to the complexity of the detection of microplastics in the environment, no routine analytical method has yet been established and the exact sample processing and sample analysis is still very complex with the current state of the art. This makes it difficult to precisely quantify the individual input pathways of microplastics and to distinguish between primary and secondary microplastics. Based on the microplastics detected in the environment so far, secondary microplastics, which are formed in the environment by fragmentation of larger plastic waste, seem to play a major role. Among other things, careless and incorrect disposal causes this waste to enter the environment (Bertling et al. 2018, Hess et al. 2018, Essel et al. 2015).
noch kein routinefähiges Analyseverfahren etabliert und die exakte Probenaufarbeitung sowie Probenanalyse ist mit dem aktuellen Stand der Technik noch sehr aufwendig. Dies erschwert eine genaue Quantifizierung der einzelnen Eintragspfade von Mikroplastik, sowie die Unterscheidung, ob es sich um primäres oder sekundäres Mikroplastik handelt. Ausgehend von dem bisher in der Umwelt nachgewiesenen Mikroplastik, scheint sekundäres Mikroplastik, welches in der Umwelt durch Fragmentierung von größerem Plastikmüll entstanden ist, eine große Rolle zu spielen. Unter anderem durch achtlose und fehlerhafte Entsorgung gelangt dieser Müll in die Umwelt (Bertling et al. 2018, Hess et al. 2018, Essel et al. 2015).

Requirement for Action

Certain input pathways can be addressed under the responsibility of the industry and reduced. For example, the transport loss of pellets used in plastics production and processing, as well as microplastics added to products (e.g. cosmetics added to products (e.g. cosmetics, detergents). With relatively little effort, these two sources of input can be avoided. This requires switching to plastic-free and biodegradable substitutes such as BIOMERE.
reduziert werden. Zum Beispiel der Transportverlust von Pellets, die bei der
Kunststoffherstellung und Verarbeitung verwendet werden, sowie Mikroplastik das
Produkten zugesetzt wird (z.B. Kosmetika, Reinigungsmittel).
Mit relativ geringem Aufwand sind diese beiden Eintragsquellen zu vermeiden.
Dazu muss auf plastikfreie und biologisch abbaubare Substitute wie BIOMERE gewechselt werden.

Are microplastics ingested by living organisms? What effects does it have?

Affecting humans and animals

Many different creatures with very different diets ingest microplastics with their food. microplastics with their food. The smaller the plastic particle, the greater the risk of ingestion and the risk of ingestion and the number of animals that consume it. Microplastics are passed and accumulated in the food web and eventually end up in humans through ingestion(Elizalde-Velázquez et al. 2020, Carbery et al. 2018, Rochman et al. 2017).
Mikroplastik mit der Nahrung auf. Je kleiner der Plastikpartikel ist, desto größer das
Risiko der Aufnahme und die Anzahl der Tiere, die es konsumieren.
Mikroplastik wird im Nahrungsnetz weitergegeben und angereichert und landet schließlich auch durch Nahrungsaufnahme beim Mensch(Elizalde-Velázquez et al. 2020, Carbery et al. 2018, Rochman et al. 2017).

Current research results on possible impacts are still very contradictory due to the high complexity of the different types of plastics and their possible additives (Bucci et al. 2020). In addition, there are only few reliable data on the occurrence, size and type of microplastics that allow an environmentally relevant review (Triebskorn et al. 2019, Wendt-Potthoff et al. 2017).

Effects and Their Research

A potential risk factor of microplastics for an organism is that particles and fibers accumulate in the gastrointestinal tract and can be poorly excreted. This can cause damage to sensitive tissues, intestinal obstruction, injury to mucous membranes and inflammation. Further damage is caused by the plastics or by additives. Additives in polymers are added for specific, desired or required properties (e.g. plasticizers, UV protection, flame retardants, etc.) but also for processability (e.g. lubricants). They can release back from the polymer and have a direct toxic effect or hormone-like effects (Zimmermann et al. 2019). In addition, plastics can accumulate and transport other organic pollutants.
transportieren.

The uptake, release and effect of microplastic substances, as well as the increased contamination of organisms that may result, is an urgent research topic and is being investigated within the framework of MiPAq at TUM.
dadurch möglicherweise entstehende erhöhte Belastung von Organismen ist ein dringlicher Forschungsgegenstand und wird im Rahmen von MiPAq an der TUM
Untersucht.

Is microplastic harmful?

The European Chemicals Agency ECHA expresses the following concerns about the risks of synthetic microplastics for the environment as well as for human health (DG ECHA (2019)):

1) The microplastic particles are very small. This makes penetration into all organisms easy and allows easy transfer within food chains.
The chemical structure of plastic also means that organic toxins can be bound in it. These substances are then in turn absorbed in high concentrations by animals through their food. Today, microplastics are found in mussels, whales, turtles, birds, pigs and cattle, and ultimately they also enter the human organism.

2) Microplastics do not biodegrade at all or biodegrade very slowly: This means that the particles persist in the environment for a very long time and accumulate over time. The degradation time of microplastics is estimated to be several hundred years. For example, 12,000 plastic particles have been detected in one liter of ice in the Arctic.

3) The progressive fragmentation of plastic leads to smaller and smaller particles, theoretically down to nanoplastic particles.

4) There is virtually no way to remove microplastics from the environment once they have been released.

In addition, due to the chemical structure of plastic, organic toxins are bound in it, which in turn are ingested in high concentrations by animals through food.

What is the connection between microplastics found in Germany and the plastic waste problem in the world's oceans?

Waste Problem in the Environment

Despite Germany's waste disposal and recycling system, plastic waste and microplastics are found in the environment. Studies conducted in Germany (Hess et al. 2018), and worldwide (Dris et al. 2018, Wendt-Potthoff et al. 2017) indicate that a large proportion of the plastic waste entered the environment through improper disposal (so-called littering). Once in the environment, large pieces of plastic such as bags, packaging, construction materials, parts of sports equipment, or broken children's toys create secondary microplastics. Thus, a significant proportion of plastic waste produced on land and not properly disposed of enters the ocean via rivers and lakes, where it can accumulate.

Germany’s Contribution

It is often argued that most of the visible input (macroplastics) does not come from highly developed countries like Germany, but from emerging countries in Asia and Africa. Especially countries without functioning waste disposal and recycling are affected, they say. Nevertheless, Germany is one of the main users of plastics throughout Europe. For example, consumption of plastic (including as packaging for convenience products) is higher than in less developed countries (Schüler 2016). This increases the risk of inputs into the environment.

Required Action

Germany has a major responsibility in the search for solutions to reduce the input of plastics into the environment. Major civil society alliances have joined forces with demands for the "way out of the plastic crisis". Many different options for action are available to us here. Among other things, collection and recycling rates in Germany should improve, for example, by putting a deposit on plastic beverage containers (Kauertz et al. 2018) or increasing the use of recyclates in the production of plastic packaging (Mödinger 2020).

One promising way to avoid microplastics is to substitute polymers with sustainable biomers. Biomers are high-melting, hard waxes that have perfect surface properties such as UV and temperature resistance, chemical resistance, and scratch and abrasion resistance. Manufacturing costs are equivalent to conventional polymeric waxes. Biomers have the invaluable advantage of being biodegradable.

Laws and Regulations

What is the opinion of the EU?

The European Chemicals Agency „(…) considers that microplastics
should be treated as a non-threshold substances for the purposes of risk assessment,
similar to PBT/vPvB substances under the REACH regulation, with any release to the
environment assumed to result in a risk. Therefore, the Dossier Submitter has concluded
that the risks arising from intentional uses of microplastics that result in releases to the
environment are not adequately controlled (ECHA (2019), S. 10)).

In other words, the EU has recognized the problem of microplastics and, above all, deliberately used microplastics, and sees great scope for action in the regulation of these additives.

More information about the European strategy to solve this problem can be found Read More finden.

Are there EU regulations that govern the use of microplastics?

In 2017, the European Commission asked ECHA to assess the scientific evidence in order to take regulatory action at EU level to address intentionally added microplastics in products (substances and mixtures).

In January 2019, ECHA proposed a wide-ranging restriction on microplastics in products marketed in the EU/EEA to prevent or reduce their release into the environment. A consultation on the restriction proposal was held from March to September 2019. 477 individual comments were received by ECHA. Details of the consultation, including non-confidential responses, are available on ECHA's website.

The proposal aims to prevent the release of 500,000 tons of microplastics over a 20-year period.

Further options for reducing the release of unintentionally formed microplastics in the aquatic environment are being considered by the Commission as part of its Plastics Strategy and the new Circular Economy Action Plan.
ECHA's Risk Assessment Committee (RAC) delivered its opinion in June 2020. It supported the proposal and recommended stricter criteria for biodegradable polymers and a ban on microplastics used as infill material in artificial turf fields after a transition period of six years. The RAC also concluded that the 100 nanometer (nm) lower limit for the restriction of microplastics, as proposed by ECHA, was not necessary for enforcement and did not recommend a lower limit.

The Socio-Economic Analysis Committee (SEAC) issued its opinion in December 2020. It supported ECHA's proposal but made some recommendations for the European Commission to consider in the decision-making phase.

The SEAC recommended, among other things, a lower limit of 1 nm for the restriction of microplastics. It also considered that a temporary lower limit of 100 nm may be necessary to ensure that the restriction can be enforced by detecting microplastics in products.

With respect to controlling the release of infill material in artificial turf fields, SEAC did not prefer any of the risk management options proposed by ECHA over the others. The committee indicated that the choice would ultimately depend on policy priorities, particularly with regard to reducing emissions.

The Commission is expected to base its proposal on the ECHA report and the joint opinion of the Committees. The Commission's proposal to amend the list of restricted substances under Annex XVII of REACH will be submitted to a vote of the EU Member States in the REACH Committee. Before the restriction can be adopted, it must be considered by the European Parliament and the Council.

Schedule

Are there countries outside the EU with regulations to reduce primary microplastics?

There are a few countries that are committed against the deliberate addition of microplastics. For example, Canada , USA and South Korea have enacted similar bans on microplastics in cosmetics. New Zealand has enacted microplastics in polishes and detergents that go directly into nature. Australia, India and Brazil have at least initiated a process to regulate cosmetics.

Overall, however, there is no worldwide attention to this problem.

More info (p.24f.)

Why are certain chemical substances subject to restriction procedures?

Restriction procedures are initiated to protect human health and the environment from unacceptable hazards posed by chemicals. The manufacture, marketing (including import) or use of a substance may be restricted or banned if there is an unacceptable risk to health. Restrictions affecting the substance may also be imposed, such as technical measures or labeling.

What do restriction procedures apply to?

A restriction may apply not only to the chemical substance as such, but also to the use of the chemical substance in a mixture or in an article. Even if substances are not subject to authorization (such as substances manufactured or imported in quantities of less than one ton per year or certain polymers), they may still be affected by restrictions.

How do restriction procedures work in the EU? 

An EU member state or the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) can initiate a restriction procedure on a particular substance. This occurs when there are concerns that the substance poses an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. The intention to prepare a restriction proposal is published in the register of notifications of intent and announced in good time. 
The restriction proposal dossier contains a risk assessment and the recommendation of restriction measures. The dossier must be submitted to ECHA within 12 months after notification of the intention to prepare a proposal. 

Committee opinions
ECHA's committees receive the dossier and check whether the proposal meets certain restriction requirements. If so, the dossier is made publicly available for inspection. The evaluation and proposed action are then discussed at ECHA with the participation of member states and the public.
ECHA's Risk Assessment Committee (RAC) issues an opinion within nine months of publication on whether the proposed restriction is appropriate to reduce the risk to human health or the environment.
The Socio-Economic Analysis Committee (SEAC) simultaneously drafts an opinion on the socio-economic impact of the proposed restrictions. The SEAC shall issue its final opinion within twelve months of the launch of the initial consultation on the restriction proposal

Decision 
The decision on the restriction measures of a substance is taken by the EU Commission on the basis of the two opinions of the ECHA Committees.
Within three months of receiving the two committee opinions, the Commission will send a draft amendment to the list of restrictions in Annex XVII of the REACH Regulation. The Member States and the European Parliament will consider the final decision, and a committee procedure will be used to make the decision. 

Enforcement
Member States are responsible for enforcing the restriction once it has been legally adopted. It is binding on the industry, i.e. all actors, including manufacturers, importers, distributors, downstream users and retailers. 

How far along is ECHA with the restriction?

Proposed Restriction
In 2017, the European Commission asked ECHA to prepare regulatory measures at EU level concerning intentionally added microplastics in products (substances and mixtures). 

An ECHA proposal for wide-ranging restrictions on microplastics in products placed on the EU/EEA market to prevent or reduce their release into the environment was presented two years later.
The proposal aims to prevent the release of 500,000 tons of microplastics over a 20-year period.

Committee Opinions
RAC issued an opinion in June 2020 and SEAC in December 2020. In principle, both support the ECHA proposal

Decision of the European Commission and the EU Member States
It can be assumed that the Commission will be guided by the ECHA report and the joint opinion of the committees. It is expected that the Commission's proposal to amend the list of restricted substances under Annex XVII of the REACH Regulation will be submitted to the EU Member States in the REACH Committee for a vote in 2021. After that, the restriction still has to be adopted by the European Parliament and the Council.

Ways to Get Out of the Plastic Crisis

Greenpeace - Ways to get out of the plastic crisis

DEMAND 8: BAN PRIMARY MICROPLASTICS
Ban the use of primary microplastics and other dissolved, liquid, gel or wax synthetic polymers in products with environmental applications.
According to an estimate by the Fraunhofer UMSICHT Institute, about 330,000 tons of primary microplastics from various sources are released into the environment in Germany every year, which corresponds to about 4 kg per person per year. It is estimated that about 11% of these are emissions of microplastics, which are deliberately produced and, above all, intentionally used.
Targeted primary microplastics (type A) are used in large quantities in surfacing for sports fields and playgrounds. For example, about 120 tons of plastic granules are used as bedding per artificial turf field, with an annual replenishment of three to five tons per field. Assuming that about half of the replenishment is due to the compaction of the granules and the other half to the discharge of the granules into the environment, this results in microplastic emissions of 1.5 to 2.5 tons per field and year.
Another example of the intended environmentally friendly use of primary microplastics is nutrient granules used in agriculture. The microplastics processed in them are intended to release nutrients and other active substances into the soil in a controlled manner over a certain period of time. However, it is thus also introduced into the soil itself.
Manufacturers also use a large number of synthetic polymers (liquid, dissolved, waxy or gel-like) specifically in cosmetic and personal care products: The International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients (INCI) list includes between 16,000 and 21,000 substances, while the EU cosmetic ingredients database "CosIng" lists a total of over 28,000 substances. The exact number of polymers used and their (accumulating) effect are not known; moreover, there is a lack of information on quantities used worldwide. Because wastewater treatment plants cannot filter them out of wastewater completely, they enter water bodies almost unhindered and also reach our fields via sewage sludge.
Women use far more cosmetics and personal care products than men - up to 15 different products every day. This makes the risk of exposure to products containing microplastics all the greater for them. During pregnancy, microplastic particles can pass through the placenta to the fetus.
We demand from the German government that these easily avoidable and often consciously accepted inputs into the environment are prevented by a ban on the use of primary microplastics and synthetic polymers in products with environmental applications. The possible corresponding alternatives should be assessed by independent institutes for human and ecotoxicological safety and all data from existing and future assessments should be published in full transparency.
This means in particular:
- Prohibition of the use and application of non-recoverable plastic granules in surfaces of sports fields and playgrounds (e.g. artificial turf fields).
- Ban on the use of microplastics in agricultural nutrient granules.
- Complete ban on the use of microplastic particles and synthetic polymers in cosmetics and personal care products as well as in products in the washing, cleaning and detergent sector, applying the precautionary principle (with no lower limit on sizes or aggregate state) and without exception in all product segments.
The German government must play an active role in the current EU process to ban microplastics deliberately added to products and ensure that the precautionary principle is consistently applied in the planned restriction under the European chemicals regulation REACH.
Microplastic particles in wastewater are theoretically filtered out mechanically in wastewater treatment plants. However, they accumulate in the sewage sludge and are released onto fields and into the environment. Moreover, wastewater treatment plants cannot completely remove microplastic particles from wastewater by conventional means. The retention capacity of different wastewater treatment plants differs greatly... So far, only a system with a fourth treatment stage in the form of a disc-cloth filter has been able to reduce the amount of plastic particles in wastewater by 97%. Therefore, we demand that manufacturers and distributors of all other products that cause micropollutants in wastewater be required to finance the expansion of treatment capacity and stages of municipal wastewater treatment plants, in accordance with a consistently enforced EPR . Upgrading should be considered in particular if drinking water is produced in the area of influence of the wastewater treatment plant, the receiving water body carries a high proportion of wastewater, or has particularly high concentrations of microplastics.
When using intentionally produced primary microplastics in non-environmentally friendly areas, it must be ensured, e.g. by amending the Wastewater Ordinance for discharges from industrial and commercial enterprises, that the particles do not enter the environment at any time during production, transport, use and disposal. There must also be a reuse, recycling or disposal option that makes sense from a sustainability perspective in order to move closer to the goal of a circular economy.
Furthermore, the reversal of the burden of proof for the applicant and transparent evidence applies. This concerns, among other things, the use of polymer blasting agents, powdered polymers (e.g. laser sintering powders for 3D printers) and plastic pellets.

Source

How do I find out if a product contains microplastics or polymer additives?

As long as little can be expected from politicians and manufacturers, it is up to us consumers to avoid microplastics ourselves wherever possible. Only in the case of cosmetics is there an obligation to list all ingredients in writing on the packaging. At least with these products, it is quite easy for us to find out whether a product contains microplastics. This is in contrast to cleaning agents, for example, in which microplastics are also used more often, but where there is no labeling obligation.

However, the term "simple" must be used here in very large quotation marks. Because there are several dozen terms behind which microplastics are hidden. If the following terms can be found on the ingredients list, the product contains primary microplastics:
- Acrylat Copolymer (AC)
• Acrylate Crosspolymer (ACS)
• Dimethiconol
• Methicone
• Polyamide (PA, Nylon)
• Polyacrylate (PA)
• Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)
• Polyquaternium (PQ)
• Polyethylene (PE)
• Polyethylene glycol (PEG)*
• Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
• Polypropylene (PP)
• Polypropylene glycol (PPG)*
• Polystyrene (PS)
• Polyurethane (PUR)
• Siloxane
• Silsesquioxane

But there are many other terms behind which microplastics can hide. Greenpeace and BUND offer checklists that you can print out for your shopping. There are also appsthat can help you check the ingredients list of cosmetics for hidden microplastic content.

What can I do as a private person?

In order not to pollute the environment with even more plastic waste, it is essential that it is collected reliably and disposed of properly. Germany is a pioneer when it comes to collection: many municipalities collect the recyclable materials they generate or offer the yellow bag or yellow garbage can (dual system). The Reduce-Reuse-Recycle principle is more relevant today than ever before: many people are making efforts to generate less waste or are finding creative ideas to create something new from it ("upcycling") and these approaches should be further encouraged and supported.
In principle, the global approach to the circular economy is another important way to use raw materials as effectively as possible and to recycle any waste generated in the best possible and most sensible way. All consumers are called upon to dispose of product residues after use (including packaging) in accordance with local regulations and to feed them into recycling systems. At the same time, manufacturers should already have the entire product life cycle in mind when designing and manufacturing a product and make it possible and as easy as possible to replace parts, repair and, in the end, simply separate and recycle the raw materials used. Here, moreover, every consumer can increase the recycling rate by separating the individual packaging components when disposing of them. Connected components, such as the aluminum lid and the yogurt pot, can only be separated from each other with difficulty or usually not at all in technical processes of recycling plants and thus escape the recycling process.

Products containing primary microplastics should be avoided. To this end, the NGO BUND published a shopping guide in 2015, which is continuously updated, listing cosmetic products containing microplastics. It also lists abbreviations from the ingredient statements behind which plastics are hidden. Most manufacturers meanwhile do not use microplastics in their products.

Avoiding or reducing the plastic products used or using plastic-free alternatives. In some circumstances, leaving the car parked can also contribute to this. With 1.23 kg of microplastic per capita and year in Germany, tire wear is a major source of microplastics in the environment (Bertling et al. 2018).

Do wastewater treatment plants offer sufficient protection against microplastics?

Discharge of microplastics with wastewater

Microplastics enter wastewater and sewage treatment plants via households and industry as well as from nature, for example through the abrasion of car tires on the road.
Wastewater treatment plants have different levels of design for water treatment with corresponding separation efficiency. It is currently believed that a large proportion of microplastics can be separated (Simon et al. 2018, Talvitie et al. 2017, Carr et al. 2016, Murphy et al. 2016, Talvitie et al. 2015). The studies come to different conclusions, so the effectiveness of the separation performance cannot be assessed with certainty. There are physical, chemical, and biological methods such as incorporating particles into activated sludge flocs, using final sand filtration, or by physical separation in membrane bioreactors or disk-cloth filters possible (Mintenig et al. 2017, Talvitie et al. 2017). Wastewater treatment plants are not causative agents of microplastic pollution in the aquatic environment; however, they cannot completely filter out microplastics either. The problem is well known by the operators of wastewater treatment plants that they should make a significant contribution to water pollution control. Complete separation of the microplastic would help, or if a biodegradable product could be used instead of microplastic.

In order to separate microplastics even better in wastewater treatment plants, a further treatment stage in the form of microfiltration must be installed. In terms of energy input and investment, this is costly. In addition, the effectiveness of such filtration is questionable, since microplastics are disposed of with the sewage sludge. Depending on how it is disposed of, it can re-enter the environment, as sewage sludge and thus the microplastics it contains are often used as fertilizer (Zhang, L. et al. 2020, Weithmann et al. 2018). In Europe, more than 1/3 of sewage sludge is applied as fertilizer on agricultural fields.

In absolute numbers, there is still a considerable residual amount of microplastic that is not filtered out by wastewater treatment plants. Studies show that relatively large amounts of microplastics enter the aquatic environment by other means despite separation in wastewater treatment plants (Talvitie et al. 2017, Carr et al. 2016, Murphy et al. 2016).

Other Discharges of Microplastics Into Water Bodies

Combined sewer overflows kick in during heavy rain events. Part of the stormwater overflow is conveyed through the sewer system to the wastewater treatment plant. The other part of the inflow is discharged over a threshold into a body of water. In this way, microplastics enter the receiving waters unfiltered (Baresel et al. 2019).
A significant percentage of households in Europe are also not connected to a wastewater treatment plant. According to the UN report, around 90% of wastewater in developing countries is discharged directly into surface water. Without filtration through wastewater treatment plants, only a biodegradable alternative to microplastics would provide a remedy for the problem.

Less is More Campaign (BMU)

The BMU's "Less is More" campaign shows ways in which everyone can get personally involved and make their own contribution. It also summarizes all the measures taken by the German government to get to grips with the micro-macro plastic problem.
Mehr Infos dazu

Read More

References

Abbasi et al. 2019. Distribution and potential health impacts of microplastics and microrubbers in air and street dusts from Asaluyeh County, Iran. Environmental Pollution 244: 153-164.
Ambrosini et al. 2019. First evidence of microplastic contamination in the supraglacial debris of an alpine glacier. Environmental Pollution 253: 297-301.
Anger & von der Esch et al. 2018. Raman microspectroscopy as a tool for microplastic particle analysis. Trends in Analytical Chemistry 109: 214-226.
Baresel & Olshammar. 2019. On the importance of sanitary sewer overflow on the total discharge of microplastics from sewage water. Journal of Environmental Protection (10): 14.
Bergmann et al. 2017a. Vast Quantities of Microplastics in Arctic Sea Ice—A Prime Temporary Sink for Plastic Litter and a Medium of Transport. Pages 75-76 in Baztan Juan, Jorgensen Bethany, Pahl Sabine, Thompson Richard C., Vanderlinden Jean-Paul, eds. Fate and Impact of Microplastics in Marine Ecosystems, Elsevier.
Bergmann et al. 2017b. High Quantities of Microplastic in Arctic Deep-Sea Sediments from the HAUSGARTEN Observatory. Environmental Science & Technology 51(19): 11000-11010.
Bergmann et al. 2019. White and wonderful? Microplastics prevail in snow from the Alps to the Arctic. Science Advances 5(8): eaax1157.
Bertling et al. 2018. Kunststoffe in der Umwelt: Mikro- und Makroplastik, Ursachen, Mengen, Umweltschicksale, Wirkungen Lösungsansätze, Empfehlungen; Kurzfassung der Konsortialstudie. Fraunhofer UMSICHT Oberhausen.
Bertling et al. 2018. Kunststoffe in der Umwelt: Mikro- und Makroplastik, Ursachen, Mengen, Umweltschicksale, Wirkungen Lösungsansätze, Empfehlungen; Kurzfassung der Konsortialstudie. Fraunhofer UMSICHT Oberhausen.
Braun et al. 2018. Diskussionspapier „Mikroplastik-Analytik“ – Probenahme, Probenaufbereitung und Detektionsverfahren. BMBF Forschungsschwerpunkt „Plastik in der Umwelt“, Querschnittsthema „Analytik und Referenzmaterialien“.
Bucci et al. 2020. What is known and unknown about the effects of plastic pollution: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Ecological Applications 30(2): e02044.
Carbery et al. 2018. Trophic transfer of microplastics and mixed contaminants in the marine food web and implications for human health. Environment International 115: 400- 409.
Carr et al. 2016. Transport and fate of microplastic particles in wastewater treatment plants. Water Research 91: 174-182.
Catarino et al. 2018. Low levels of microplastics (MP) in wild mussels indicate that MP ingestion by humans is minimal compared to exposure via household fibres fallout during a meal. Environ Pollut 237: 675-684.
Dris et al. 2017. A first overview of textile fibers, including microplastics, in indoor and outdoor environments. Environ Pollut 221: 453-458.
Dris et al. 2018. Chapter 3 – Microplastic Contamination in Freshwater Systems: Methodological Challenges, Occurrence and Sources. Pages 51-93 in Zeng Eddy Y., ed. Microplastic Contamination in Aquatic Environments, Elsevier.
Elizalde-Velázquez et al. 2020. Translocation, trophic transfer, accumulation and depuration of polystyrene microplastics in Daphnia magna and Pimephales promelas. Environmental Pollution 259: 113937.
Enders et al. 2015. Abundance, size and polymer composition of marine microplastics ≥ 10 μm in the Atlantic Ocean and their modelled vertical distribution. Marine Pollution Bulletin 100(1): 70-81.
Essel et al. 2015. Quellen für Mikroplastik mit Relevanz für den Meeresschutz in Deutschland. Dessau-Roßlau: Umweltbundesamt.
Gasperi et al. 2018. Microplastics in air: Are we breathing it in? Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health 1: 1-5.
Hartmann et al. 2019. Are we speaking the same language? Recommendations for a definition and categorization framework for plastic debris. Environmental Science & Technology 53(3): 1039-1047.
Hess et al. 2018. Mikroplastik in Binnengewässern Süd- und Westdeutschlands. Teil 1: Kunsttsoffpartikel in der oberflächennahen Wasserphase. Karlsruhe, Augsburg, Wiesbaden, Recklinghausen, Mainz: Bundesländerübergreifende Untersuchungen in Baden-Württemberg, Bayern, Hessen, Nordrhein-Westfahlen und Rheinland-Pfalz.
Huang et al. 2020. Agricultural plastic mulching as a source of microplastics in the terrestrial environment. Environmental Pollution 260: 114096.
Hurley et al. 2020. Chapter 7 – Plastic waste in the terrestrial environment. Pages 163- 193 in Letcher Trevor M., ed. Plastic Waste and Recycling, Academic Press.
Imhof et al. 2013. Contamination of beach sediments of a subalpine lake with microplastic particles. Current Biology 23(19): R867-R868.
Imhof et al. 2016. Pigments and plastic in limnetic ecosystems: A qualitative and quantitative study on microparticles of different size classes. Water Research 98: 64-74.
Imhof et al. 2017. Spatial and temporal variation of macro-, meso- and microplastic abundance on a remote coral island of the Maldives, Indian Ocean. Marine Pollution Bulletin (116): 340-347.
Ivleva et al. 2017. Microplastic in aquatic ecosystems. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 56(7): 1720-1739.
Kauertz et al. 2018. FKN Ökobilanz 2018. Heidelberg: Institut für Energie und Umweltforschung Heidelberg (ifeu)
Klein & Fischer. 2019. Microplastic abundance in atmospheric deposition within the Metropolitan area of Hamburg, Germany. Science of the Total Environment 685: 96-103.
Liu et al. 2019. Widespread distribution of PET and PC microplastics in dust in urban China and their estimated human exposure. Environment International 128: 116-124.
Liu et al. 2020. Plastic and microplastic pollution: From ocean smog to planetary boundary threats. Pages 229-240 in Jiang Guibin, Li Xiangdong, eds. A New Paradigm for Environmental Chemistry and Toxicology: From Concepts to Insights. Singapore: Springer Singapore.
Miklos et al. 2016. Mikroplastik: Entwicklung eines Umweltbewertungskonzepts. Umweltbundesamt.
Mintenig et al. 2014. Mikroplastik in ausgewählten Kläranlagen des Oldenburgisch-Ostfriesischen Wasserverbandes (OOWV) in Niedersachsen. Niedersächsicher Lanbdesbetrieb für Wasserwirtschaft, Küsten- und Naturschutz (NLWKN).
Mintenig et al. 2017. Identification of microplastic in effluents of waste water treatment plants using focal plane array-based micro-Fourier-transform infrared imaging. Water Research 108: 365-372.
Mödinger. 2020. Eine ganzheitliche Orientierung – Ein Kommentar zur Nachhaltigkeit von Verpackungen. BRAUINDUSTRIE (5 / 2020).
Möller et al. 2020. Finding microplastics in soils: A review of analytical methods. Environmental Science & Technology 54(4): 2078-2090.
Murphy et al. 2016. Wastewater treatment works (WwTW) as a source of microplastics in the aquatic environment. Environmental Science & Technology 50(11): 5800-5808.
Rochman et al. 2017. Direct and indirect effects of different types of microplastics on freshwater prey (Corbicula fluminea) and their predator (Acipenser transmontanus). PLoS ONE 12(11): e0187664.
Schüler. 2016. Aufkommen und Verwertung von Verpackungsabfällen in Deutschland im Jahr 2015.
Schwaiger. 2019. Mikroplastik in bayerischen Seen. Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt (LfU).
Simon et al. 2018. Quantification of microplastic mass and removal rates at wastewater treatment plants applying Focal Plane Array (FPA)-based Fourier Transform Infrared (FT-IR) imaging. Water Research 142: 1-9.
Talvitie et al. 2015. Do wastewater treatment plants act as a potential point source of microplastics? Preliminary study in the coastal Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea. Water Science and Technology 72(9): 1495.
Talvitie et al. 2017. Solutions to microplastic pollution – Removal of microplastics from wastewater effluent with advanced wastewater treatment technologies. Water Research 123: 401-407.
Triebskorn et al. 2019. Relevance of nano- and microplastics for freshwater ecosystems: A critical review. Trends in Analytical Chemistry 110: 375-392.
Verla et al. 2019. Microplastic–toxic chemical interaction: A review study on quantified levels, mechanism and implication. Applied Sciences 1(11): 1400.
Weithmann et al. 2018. Organic fertilizer as a vehicle for the entry of microplastic into the environment. Sci Adv 4.
Wendt-Potthoff et al. 2017. Mikroplastik in Binnengewässern. Handbuch Angewandte Limnologie: Grundlagen – Gewässerbelastung – Restaurierung – Aquatische Ökotoxikologie – Bewertung – Gewässerschutz, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA.
Zhang et al. 2019. Importance of atmospheric transport for microplastics deposited in remote areas. Environmental Pollution 254: 112953.
Zhang et al. 2020. An Overlooked Entry Pathway of Microplastics into Agricultural Soils from Application of Sludge-Based Fertilizers. Environ Sci Technol.
Internetdokumente:
https://act.greenpeace.de/wege-aus-der-plastikkrise
https://echa.europa.eu/de/hot-topics/microplastics
https://echa.eurohttps://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/05bd96e3-b969-0a7c-c6d0-441182893720pa.eu/documents/10162/05bd96e3-b969-0a7c-c6d0-441182893720
https://www.bund.net/service/publikationen/detail/publication/bund-einkaufsratgeber-mikroplastik/
https://www.greenpeace.de/sites/www.greenpeace.de/files/publications/20170502-greenpeace-kurzinfo-plastik-kosmetik.pdf

You are donating to : Greennature Foundation

How much would you like to donate?
$10 $20 $30
Would you like to make regular donations? I would like to make donation(s)
How many times would you like this to recur? (including this payment) *
Name *
Last Name *
Email *
Phone
Address
Additional Note
Loading...
en_US