No Sparkle, No Shine: Why Europe has banned glitter

The European Union keeps up its fight against microplastics. This time, they are going after glitters. The sale of microplastics in consumer goods like detergents and cosmetics has been banned by the European Commission, which came into effect on 17 October. The initiative is part of a larger effort to reduce environmentally hazardous microplastic pollution in member countries by 30 per cent by 2030. Here’s all we know about the ban. Loose glitters ban The sale of loose glitter and goods containing certain microbeads, tiny synthetic polymer particles, and other microplastics is no longer permitted in Europe. However, not all glitter is prohibited. The new regulations primarily target loose plastic glitter; biodegradable glitter is still permitted but may soon face restrictions on its usage in cosmetics, nail treatments, and other personal care products. The move was proposed by the European Commission last month with the claim that it will prevent the discharge of about 500,000 tonnes of microplastics into the environment, as per The Guardian. According to reports, German shoppers apparently rushed to stock up on glitter before the ban went into force. One contestant from the country’s celebrity Big Brother show reportedly told a local tabloid that he purchased 82 packets of glitter before they were removed off the shelves because “In my world, everything has to glitter.” Why is it necessary Office chairs and water bottles are made from tiny, strong plastic pellets, sometimes known as nurdles or nibs, that are melted down and reshaped. However, they are environmentally harmful at every step of the supply chain. They degrade into microplastics over time, which both humans and animals may consume via food and drink. According to the commission, the amount of plastic pellets emitted into the environment each year in the European Union ranges from 52,000 to 184,000 tonnes. While speaking to The Guardian, Virginijus Sinkevičius, EU commissioner for the environment, oceans and fisheries, said, “The most important thing is to cut pollution at the source. What we are looking to do is basically ensure we drastically cut, at the source, pollution of microplastics.” Dana Kühnel, from the Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research told the outlet, “Preventing plastic release is much more effective than managing microplastics.” EU aims high By the end of this decade, the EU’s proposal seeks to reduce plastic pellet pollution by 74 per cent. According to the European Commission, it would ultimately result in a seven per cent reduction in the country’s microplastic pollution. The commission urges pellet handlers to take safeguards to prevent environmental impact as part of its campaign to reduce microplastic contamination by 30 per cent by 2030. It wants them to avoid spills altogether, minimise spills that occur, and clean up errors just in case. The proposal includes best handling practices for operators and mandatory certifications from an independent third party. But smaller operators will simply be allowed to “self declare” that they have complied with the rules. “There are lighter requirements for small and medium-sized enterprises to reduce the economic burden,” said Sinkevičius. The European Council and Parliament will now discuss the proposal. A rising tide of microplastics Doctors and scientists have long expressed concern that the growing amount of microplastics could be harmful to human health as they accumulate in the body. In their initial state, plastic pellets are not small enough to harm humans greatly, but when they degrade, they become microscopic fragments that can enter the bloodstream and lungs. If nothing is done, the amount of microplastic contamination in the world is predicted to double by 2040, according to a study by the non-profit Pew Charitable Trusts. The Guardian quoted Eleonore Fröhlich, from the Medical University of Graz, as saying, “Great parts of the respiratory tract are covered with a thin layer of cells and only a little mucus, which makes this barrier more permeable and vulnerable than the gastrointestinal tract and the skin. “In this respect, the regulation will be more effective than the ban on intentionally added microplastic to consumer products that mainly contact the skin – which is a protective and less permeable barrier of the human body.” For more than three decades, industry best practice measures have been voluntary and have received little acceptance, according to Siegfried Schmuck, a Pew ocean conservation specialist. “The EU Commission’s proposal means we now have the chance to hold industry accountable by making these mandatory – and effectively reduce the third-largest source of microplastic pollution in the EU,” he told the news outlet. With inputs from agencies