Since the ocean is downstream from nearly every terrestrial location, it is the receiving body for much of the plastic waste generated on land. Several million tons of debris end up in the world’s oceans every year, and much of it is improperly discarded plastic litter. The first oceanographic study to examine the amount of near-surface plastic debris in the world’s oceans was published in 2014. It estimated that at least 5.25 trillion individual plastic particles weighing roughly 244,000 metric tons (269,000 short tons) were floating on or near the surface. A 2021 study determined that 44 percent of plastic debris in rivers and oceans, and on shorelines, was made up of bags, bottles, and items related to takeout meals. Plastic pollution was first noticed in the ocean by scientists carrying out plankton studies in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and oceans and beaches still receive most of the attention of those studying and working to abate plastic pollution. Floating plastic waste has been shown to accumulate in five subtropical gyres that cover 40 percent of the world’s oceans. Located at Earth’s midlatitudes, these gyres include the North and South Pacific Subtropical Gyres, whose eastern “garbage patches” (zones with high concentrations of plastic waste circulating near the ocean surface) have garnered the attention of scientists and the media. The other gyres are the North and South Atlantic Subtropical Gyres and the Indian Ocean Subtropical Gyre.

Plastic enters aquatic environments through a variety of pathways. Some inputs originate from identifiable sources, such as industrial facilities, wastewater outfalls, or landfills, whereas many others come from diffuse sources, including litter carried by wind, stormwater runoff, and rivers transporting waste from urban and rural areas. Because plastic pollution often results from the accumulation of many dispersed sources rather than a single discharge point, reducing it requires both improved waste management and efforts to prevent plastics from entering the environment in the first place.

In the ocean, plastic pollution can kill marine mammals directly through entanglement in objects such as fishing gear, but it can also kill through ingestion, by being mistaken for food. Studies have found that all kinds of species, including small zooplankton, large cetaceans, most seabirds, and all marine turtles, readily ingest plastic bits and trash items such as cigarette lighters, plastic bags, and bottle caps. By 2025, studies noted that the risk of an animal’s mortality increased with the volume and type of plastic ingested; for example, the mortality risk in a seabird was estimated at 90 percent when it ingested only 0.044 cubic cm (0.027 cubic inch) per cm of body length of rubber and 0.095 cubic cm (0.0058 cubic inch) per cm of hard plastic.

Sunlight and seawater embrittle plastic, and the eventual breakdown of larger objects into microplastics makes plastic available to zooplankton and other small marine animals. Such small pieces of plastic, which are less than 5 mm (0.2 inch) in length, make up a sizable fraction of plastic waste in the oceans. By 2018, microplastics had been found in the organs of more than 114 aquatic species, including some species found only in the deepest ocean trenches. By 2020, scientists had estimated that at least 14 million metric tons (15.4 million short tons) of microplastic particles were resting on the floor of the ocean, and other research had revealed that the movement of deep-sea currents was creating microplastic “hot spots” in parts of the oceans, such as one located in the Tyrrhenian Sea that contained nearly two million microplastic pieces per square meter (about 186,000 pieces per square foot). Microplastics have also been detected in soils, freshwater systems, and the atmosphere, demonstrating that plastic pollution is not confined to marine environments but is distributed throughout many components of Earth’s ecosystems.

In addition to being nonnutritive and indigestible, plastics have been shown to concentrate pollutants up to a million times their level in the surrounding seawater and then deliver them to the species that ingest them. In one study, levels of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), a lubricant and insulating material that is now widely banned, were shown to have increased significantly in the preen gland oil of streaked shearwaters (Calonectris leucomelas) after these seabirds had been fed plastic pellets culled from Tokyo Bay for only one week.

As contaminated plastics move through food webs, some of the chemicals associated with them can bioaccumulate, or build up over time, in the tissues of organisms. In some cases, concentrations of these substances may also biomagnify, increasing at successively higher trophic levels as predators consume contaminated prey. The extent to which these processes occur varies depending on the chemical involved, the characteristics of the ecosystem, and the organisms being studied, and remains an active area of research.

There are also terrestrial aspects to plastic pollution. Drainage systems become clogged with plastic bags, films, and other items, causing flooding. Land birds, such as the reintroduced California condor, have been found with plastic in their stomachs, and animals that normally feed in waste dumps—for instance, the sacred cows of India—have had intestinal blockages from plastic packaging. The mass of plastic is not greater than that of other major components of waste, but it takes up a disproportionately large volume. As waste dumps expand in residential areas, the scavenging poor are often found living near or even on piles of residual plastics. In addition, wind-transported microplastic fibers and particles have been detected in many parts of the world, including the snow deposited high atop mountains, on Arctic beaches and sea ice, and in Antarctica.

Pollution by plastics additives

Plastic also pollutes without being littered—specifically, through the release of compounds used in its manufacture. Indeed, pollution of the environment by chemicals leached from plastics into air and water is an emerging area of concern. As a result, some compounds used in plastics, such as phthalates, bisphenol A (BPA), and polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE), have come under close scrutiny and regulation. Phthalates are plasticizers—softeners used to make plastic products less brittle. They are found in medical devices, food packaging, automobile upholstery, flooring materials, and computers as well as in pharmaceuticals, perfumes, and cosmetics. BPA, used in the manufacture of clear, hard polycarbonate plastics and strong epoxy coatings and adhesives, is present in packaging, bottles, compact discs, medical devices, and the linings of food cans. PBDE is added to plastics as a flame retardant. All these compounds have been detected in humans and are known to disrupt the endocrine system. Phthalates act against male hormones and are therefore known as anti-androgens; BPA mimics the natural female hormone estrogen; and PBDE has been shown to disrupt thyroid hormones in addition to being an anti-androgen. The people most vulnerable to such hormone-disrupting chemicals are children and women of reproductive age.

These compounds have also been implicated in hormone disruption of animals in terrestrial, aquatic, and marine habitats. Effects are seen in laboratory animals at blood levels lower than those found in the average resident of a developed country. Amphibians, mollusks, worms, insects, crustaceans, and fish show effects on their reproduction and development, including alterations in the number of offspring produced, disruption of larval development, and (in insects) delayed emergence—though studies investigating resulting declines in those populations have not been reported. Studies are needed to fill this knowledge gap, as are studies of the effects of exposure to mixtures of those compounds on animals and humans.

Solving the problem

1 of 3

2 of 3

3 of 3

Given the global scale of plastic pollution, the cost of removing plastics from the environment would be prohibitive. Most solutions to the problem of plastic pollution, therefore, focus on preventing improper disposal or even on limiting the use of certain plastic items in the first place. Fines for littering have proved difficult to enforce, but various fees or outright bans on foamed food containers and plastic shopping bags are now common, as are deposits redeemed by taking beverage bottles to recycling centers. So-called extended producer responsibility, or EPR, schemes make the manufacturers of some items responsible for creating an infrastructure to take back and recycle the products that they produce. Awareness of the serious consequences of plastic pollution is increasing, and new solutions, including the increasing use of biodegradable plastics and a “zero waste” philosophy, are being embraced by governments and the public.

Solid-waste management strategies differ in both their effectiveness and their environmental trade-offs. Landfills can limit the spread of improperly discarded plastics when well managed but do not eliminate the persistence of plastic waste. Incineration reduces the volume of waste but requires careful emissions controls and results in the release of carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas. Recycling can reduce demand for new plastic production but is limited by contamination, material properties, and economic factors. Consequently, many governments and environmental organizations increasingly emphasize reducing plastic consumption and designing products for reuse alongside improvements in recycling infrastructure.