As consumers are becoming more eco-conscious, they are turning to eco-friendly alternatives to glitter made from the commonly used plastic – Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET.) This has caused the production of the so-called biodegradable glitter to rise.
However, researchers from Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) in Cambridge conducted a first of its kind study on the microplastics’ impact on the environment and waterways. The results show that biodegradable glitter or ‘eco glitter’ causes the same ecological damage to lakes and rivers as ordinary glitter.
In 2018, sixty-one music festivals in the UK announced they would ban PET glitter, along with all single-use plastic by 2021, as part of the ‘Drastic on Plastic‘ initiative. That doesn’t mean there will be no glitter; instead, they would switch to biodegradable glitter. Though, the ecological or biological effects of any glitter, PET or biodegradable, have never been tested. Until now, the ARU study is thought to be the first to inspect the glitter’s environmental impacts.
There are two types of eco glitter. One has a modified regenerated cellulose (MRC) core, sourced from eucalyptus trees, coated with a reflective aluminum, and topped with an ultra-thin layer of plastic. Another is called mica glitter, which is primarily used in cosmetics. The study found that these alternative ‘biodegradable’ glitters have several effects almost identical to those observed for traditional PET glitter, including impacts on root length and chlorophyll levels.
Dr. Dannielle Green, ARU’s senior lecturer in biology, explained:
Glitter is a ready-made microplastic that is commonly found in our homes and, particularly through cosmetics, is washed off in our sinks and into the water system. Our study is the first to look at the effects of glitter in a freshwater environment, and we found that both conventional and alternative glitters can have a serious ecological impact on aquatic ecosystems within a short period of time.
The research concluded that all types of glitter, biodegradable or not, had adverse effects on vital primary producers found at the bottom of the food web. But there’s more, “Biodegradable” cellulose-based glitter might be worse because it has an additional negative impact that encourages the growth of an invasive species called the New Zealand mud snail. “We believe these effects could be caused by leachate from the glitters, possibly from their plastic coating or other materials involved in their production,” she said.
UK Supermarket Giants have announced that they would remove glitter items from their shelves before Christmas, including:
- Morrisons will remove glitter and plastic from all its own-brand ranges of wrapping paper, present bags, crackers, cards, plants and wreaths, flowers, and non-seasonal items.
- John Lewis and Waitrose will remove glitter from all their wrapping paper, crackers, cards, and gift bags for Christmas.
According to Morrisons, the decision would eliminate over 50 tons of plastic from its shelves over Christmas alone.
