There is likely no man-made material more widespread in the environment than plastics, which have increased in use exponentially in recent decades. They are present in our soils, our lakes and rivers, our oceans, our food, and even in our bodies. How is plastic getting into our environment, and what can we do about it?
How did this happen?
Plastics were developed in 1907, but did not come into wide usage until the 1940s when they gained respect during the military struggles of WWII. Plastics use surged post WWII with the product replacing steel, glass, wood, cloth and paper in many functions. The applications of plastic today are so extensive that it is hard to imagine human existence without; think of our kitchens, our cars, our computers, our cell phones, and our closets. We are blessed with wonderful products and tools for living, but the components of which also have lifespans of hundreds of years, far beyond the functional use of the items that contain them.
As early as the 1960s, plastic trash started being noticed in the environment, and today is so widespread that huge vortices in the Pacific Ocean the size of Texas are now found. The East and West Pacific Garbage Patches represent whorls of suspended plastic, much of it microplastics (less than 5mm) from breakup of larger pieces, but some of it larger structures such as lost fishing nets and floats. It is estimated that 80% of the debris is from land-based waste which mainly reaches the oceans through rivers, and 20% is sea-based. Wildlife commonly ingests or is ensnared by larger plastic debris with devastating effects.


Rapidly developing use of disposable products has overwhelmed the world’s ability to recycle and properly dispose of them, and in many parts of the world, no programs exist. Disposable products make up about 40% of plastics produced each year. Lack of recycling capability in less developed countries results in dumping of debris into the environment.

In developed countries with recycling programs and awareness of plastic issues, there is still prominent loss of plastic to the environment from breakdown products which commonly enter the environment from washing of synthetic products through septic systems. Patagonia commissioned a study at University of California Santa Barbara that estimated a single wash of a synthetic jacket cause it to shed 1.7 grams of microfibers.
Terrestrial contamination by plastics is actually much more extensive than aquatic. In some countries, sewage is spread as fertilizer, and a recent study by the Proceedings of the Royal Society found a significant reduction in subsurface organisms necessary for fertility of the soils related to ingestion of microplastics. These plastic products also degrade over time and can release toxic chemicals. Researchers believe that the effect on our ecosystems may be extensive and difficult to reverse. Indeed, some scientists have named our current epoch of Earth history as the “Plasticene Age.”
How does this affect human health?
There is extensive research being undertaken on the effects of plastics on human health, but there are still many unknowns. The effects can be divided into physical and chemical types. Of special interest are the additives to the plastics which include reinforcing fillers, plasticizers, antioxidants, UV stabilizers lubricants, dyes, and flame-retardants. These additives serve to improve functional properties of the product, but most of these are not bound to the plastics, only embedded within them. Many of them are toxic and have a high potential for contamination.
Of particular concern are EDCs (Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals) which have hormonal activity that alters the homeostasis of the endocrine system. The EDCs have been linked to a variety of diseases including cancers of the breast, prostate, and testes, genital malformations, infertility, diabetes, asthma, and neurodevelopment problems including autism. Because of the now ubiquitous nature of plastics in our environment, the public is already widely exposed. Two major classes of chemical used as additives in plastics and classified as EDCs are Bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates. Leaching of these chemicals when used as additives to plastic can occur. In the European Union, there is a ban on concentrations of several phthalates in toys and childcare items such as pacifiers above 0.1% of the plastic material.
Heavy metals are also commonly added to polymers and are known to have serious deleterious effects on human health including hormonal disruption, cancer, metabolic disturbance, congenital abnormalities, and GI complaints. Plastics have been shown to be a vector for transference of flame retardants (carcinogenic and endocrine disrupting) to animal tissues due to their avidity for fatty tissues (lipophilicity).
In an exhaustive recent review by the European Union, a “precautionary” approach to use of PVC plastic was recommended due to the potential for leaching of toxic elements into the environment and the lack of good science to understand how well embedded chemicals remain within the plastic substrate. In other words, we should be conservative in how we use PVC plastics until we know more.
European Commission, Directorate-General for Environment, The use of PVC (poly vinyl chloride) in the context of a non-toxic environment : final report, Publications Office of the European Union, 2022, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/375357
What does this mean for Henderson Inlet?
Henderson Inlet is subject to the same pressures as marine bodies everywhere in the developed world, with its watershed mainly consisting of flow from Woodland Creek and Woodard Creek through significant human development. There has been some very limited sampling for microfibers in Woodard Bay by Puget SoundKeeper where 9 microfibers were found in a water sample obtained in 2019. A graduate student at University of Washington published a survey of microfiber beach contamination in 2017, sampling sites from Everett to Tolmie State Park, showing widespread contamination. The average number of microparticles per 3 foot x 3 foot area was 1776.
https://www.ocean.washington.edu/story/Plastic_microfibers_are_common_on_Puget_Sound_beaches
We are aware of no ongoing studies on the levels of plastics in the South Puget Sound Environment, nor are shellfish grown in the inlet routinely tested for any type of chemical contaminants. The exception is wild-harvested geoduck including those from the mouth of Henderson Inlet which are tested for arsenic, required by China for export. There is routine monitoring of water quality for bacterial contaminants by the Thurston County Health Department.
There is great concern worldwide about plastic contamination in mollusks use as food sources by humans. In a recent meta-analysis6 the most Microplastic (MP) contaminated areas in the world were Asia and North America. The map below shows ingestion levels of MP in humans from eating mollusks.

The shellfish Industry argues vehemently that the plastics that they use in the environment pose no risk to humans or the environment. Attached is a letter to Thurston County from general legal council for Taylor Shellfish in 2020 arguing against revising the Shoreline Master Program to require reduction of plastics.
It is a fact that much of the MP contamination of our waterways comes from terrestrial sources, but it doesn’t stand to reason that adding great volumes of PVC and EPDM plastic along with the many chemical additives they contain has no impact especially considering the large volumes of plastic utilized. Geoduck plantations typical use about 40,000 individual pieces of 6” diameter, 12” long pipe per acre which are subject to expose to the elements and potential loss to the environment. This adds up to 8 miles of plastic pipe per acre. For the 3.6 acres of proposed geoduck at the Johnson Point site, that’s 30 miles of pvc pipe.
It is a well-accepted fact that PVC pipe degrades on exposure to sunlight, and additives are embedded to help prevent this, but it does still occur. While arguments are made that the lack of exposure to UV light prevents degradation of the pipe and release of toxic chemical agents, there is significant exposure of these tubes to daylight. The industry claims to use “marine grade” plastic to prevent this. In fact, we can find no source to buy such a product, other than ordinary schedule 80 pipe under the trademark Marine Grade.
Only approximately 50% of the tube is embedded, as seen in the below photo.

On a typical 6 hour tide cycle, tubes at the + 6 foot tide level (tubes at Zangle Cove were planted up to +5.9 feet, and the proposed planting off Johnson Point is approximately +7 feet) will be exposed to daylight including UV light for 3 hours a day, longer in the summer. Researchers use a 300 hour cycle to test pvc pipe for damage from UV radiation. Therefore, the pipe furthest from the water would reach a potentially measurable level of damage in 3 months. Over 2 years, some of the pipe could see as many as 2400 hours of exposure.

Furthermore, these tubes are typically stored outside in the open when not in use and are intended to be reused (if not lost) many times over decades with potential for significant cumulative exposure. Those tubes on the edges of the storage unit would receive many times the exposure than when embedded. By their own admission, they may reuse the tubes for 30 years or more.
Indeed, significant volumes of plastics are lost in the environment, and by admission of Thurston County officials, there is no oversight for compliance due to complete absence of funding. The proposed Johnson Point sight is also unsuitable because of the long stretches of open water leading to it. From the west, there is a fetch of 4.5 nautical miles and from the north, the full length of Case Inlet which is over 10 miles. Winds over 25 knots accompanied by significant wave action are common and can reach 50-60knots during storms.

This video was shot at the proposed geoduck site off Johnson Point loop during only 20 knots of wind. 3-4 foot waves can be seen during storm winds.
How can we reduce the environmental toll?
Plastics are here and are unavoidable, but a variety of potential solutions do exist to reduce the burden of plastics in the environment.
- Shop responsibly and avoid plastic packaging when possible
- Participate in recycling programs. https://www.thurstontalk.com/2015/09/10/plastic-recycling-101/
- In addition to standard recycling through curbside pickup in Thurston County there is special recycling available for a fee through Ridwell for many items not recyclable by LeMay services. https://www.ridwell.com/
- Support research to find biodegradable plastic products
- Consider buying non-synthetic garments
- Speak out against public policies that promote irresponsible use of plastics such as geoduck aquaculture. Make your voice heard by local officials.
References:
- Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb; 17(4): 1212. A detailed review study on potential effects of microplastics and additives of concern on human health, Published online 2020 Feb 13. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041212
2. National Geographic, The World’s Plastic Pollution Crisis Explained, June 7, 2019
3. UN Environmente Program, Plastic Planet: How tiny plastic particles are polluting our soil, 22 December 2021
4. NOAA Office of Response and Restoration, Pacific Garbage Patches
5. Science History Institute, Science Matters: The Case of Plastics
6. EHP Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol 128, No.12, Microplastic Contamination of Seafood Intended for Human Consumption: A systematic Review and Meta-analysis Published:23 December 2020CID: 126002https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7171