Environmentalists are sounding alarms about microbeads, the tiny bits of plastic used in personal care products that researchers say are too small to be filtered out of water treatment plants, so they're ending up in oceans and lakes

環保人士提出有關臉部清潔產品含柔珠的警告, 這個用在個人清潔保養用品的微小塑膠顆粒, 小到能躲過廢水處理廠的過濾, 它們的旅程終點可遠至海洋跟湖泊

If you’ve ever cleansed your face with a product that promised to gently exfoliate your T-zone, you may have been enjoying the effects of the latest scourge of environmentalists: microbeads.

如果你曾用過柔珠顆粒的洗面產品, 你可能曾享用過最近被環保人士盯上的新禍害: 柔珠

Microbeads are tiny, round bits of plastic that are found in, among other things, personal care products made by companies like Johnson & Johnson and Proctor & Gamble. They’re so small that one will just cover Abraham Lincoln’s eye on a penny. More important, researchers have found that they’re too small to be sifted out at water treatments plants, so the tiny beads are flowing down bathroom sinks and ending up in America’s lakes and oceans. Though the effects of their presence are still being investigated, five states—California, New York, Illinois, Ohio and Minnesota—are considering bills that would proactively ban their use.

柔珠, 小小圓圓顆粒, 可在Johnson & Johnson, P&G生產的個人清潔保養用品中發現, 小到美金一分錢只能遮住林肯的一隻眼睛. 更重要的是, 研究發現他們小到可躲過廢水處理廠的篩選過濾, 所以這微小一顆東西, 從浴室排水孔開始旅遊, 終點站到美國的湖泊跟海洋. 雖然還不是很清楚他們倒底會帶來怎樣的影響, 美國五大州, 加州, 紐約, 伊利諾伊, 俄亥俄, 與明尼蘇達, 都正在考慮要對這小東西提出禁用的立法. 

“The fundamental question is going to be: do we wait to take this material out until we prove that this microbead causes harm?” says Chelsea Rochman, a marine ecologist at the University of California, Davis, who specializes in microplastics research.

我們要問個最基本問題: 我們要等到證明這柔珠顆粒有害後才立法禁用嗎? 加州一位海洋生態學家Chelsea Rochman問

According to industry experts, microbeads started becoming popular with big companies about a decade ago as replacements for harsher scrubbing ingredients like pumice. Given how relatively new they are, there is little research specifically investigating how microbeads affect the environment. Still, Rochman says, there is plenty of evidence from research on other plastics suggesting that they’re probably causing more harm than good. In oceans and lakes, she says, bits of plastic “act like sponges,” soaking up toxins like pesticides and flame retardants that have also found their way into the ecosystem. And hundreds of species, from fish to plankton to wild-caught tuna, ingest bits of plastic, meaning those toxins could be ending up in the food chain.

根據(清潔保養這個產業)專家而言, 這微小顆粒起初被大公司採用是要取代過去使用起來較不舒適的浮石成份, 這是過去十年的事. 也因為使用歷史只有十年, 沒有足夠的研究顯示倒底會產生多差的影響. 還有, 其他塑料專家建議, 這些微小顆粒多半還是弊大於利. 在海洋湖泊, 他們扮演像海綿那樣的角色會吸收毒素, 像是農藥或阻燃劑的毒素. 會有幾百種生物, 包括魚到浮游生物到鳟魚, 會吃進這些微小顆粒, 代表微小顆粒吸進去的毒素也進到了食物鍊中.

Jay Ansell, a toxicologist with the trade association that represents personal care product companies, emphasizes that beyond the lack of research, there also isn’t hard proof that the beads researchers have found came from facial scrubs rather than paint or sand-blasting. Still, that hasn’t stopped many of the big companies represented by the Personal Care Products Council from taking steps away from the beads. Johnson & Johnson, which produces product lines like Clean & Clear and Neutrogena, has already announced that they’re not using microbeads in any new products and are reformulating all those that currently use them, with plans to eliminate their use entirely by 2017. Proctor & Gamble, maker of brands such as Olay, has made similar public vows.

一位代表這些大廠的毒理學專家強調, 除了缺乏長期的追蹤研究, 也缺乏證據證明那些微小顆粒是來自柔珠洗臉成份, 也可能是塗料或噴砂的微小顆粒, 這很難區分跟證明. 所以也無法制止這些大廠完全不用. 製造露得清跟可伶可俐的Johnson & Johnson已經宣布, 他們不再用這種(塑膠)柔珠顆粒, 正在改配方, 會在2017年以前全面採用新成份, 至於生產像歐蕾品牌的P&G也做類似的宣布.

“As an industry there was a feeling that this is certainly something we can do and we can do it today,” Ansell says of eliminating microbeads. “This is something we can live without.”

做為一個廠商, 這是我們能做, 我們今天就做, 柔珠成份並不是非有它不可.

So why all the legislation, if companies aren’t pushing back? “This is a game of Whack-a-Mole,” says Stiv Wilson, policy director at 5 Gyres, an organization that studies plastic in the world’s watersheds. His group drafted the legislation that has served as model in all the states that are currently considering bans. He says that laws are needed to keep big companies, however good-willed, beholden to certain timelines and to make sure smaller companies that might use microbeads don’t slip through the cracks. He believes that advocates only need two bills to become laws in U.S. states before it creates a “distribution nightmare” that will force companies’ hands.

有個機構專門研究塑料對全世界水域的影響. 他們起草法案要在某個時間表約束大公司, 也要確保小公司同樣被約束到, 不會被遺漏. 他們相信只需兩個法案立法通過, 才能真正規範整個市場. 

Both Illinois and New York look poised to pass their bills. The Illinois measure has passed the Senate and moved on to the state House. In New York, companion bills have been introduced in both chambers, and the attorney general’s office is pushing their passage. Wilson says he’s confident that California could pass their bill too, though he’s less confident about the political circumstances in Minnesota and Ohio.

伊利諾伊與紐約州暫停通過此項法案, 伊州措施在參議院已通過, 正移向州議會. 紐約的話, 公司法案已送到兩院, 總檢察長正促使其通過. 有信心加州會通過, 對明尼蘇達與俄亥俄較沒有信心

“It’s really important that these bills become law,” Wilson says. “There’s a history of companies saying they’re going to do something and then putting it off until forgotten … You’ve got to get some teeth behind these promises.” Though companies have not yet said what materials they might use as replacements, advocates have suggested natural products such as crushed walnuts and apricot shells.

這些法案通過立法很重要. 過去有經驗很多公司宣布不做什麼, 後來變成以拖待變. 所以必需有嚴格的法律放在每個承諾後面. 雖然這些大廠沒說要用什麼成份來取代柔珠微小顆粒, 會建議用些天然壓碎小顆粒, 像核桃粒或杏桃粒

An advocacy group operating under the banner “Beat the Micro Bead” is pushing similar reform in Europe. If you’re curious about whether a certain cosmetic contains microbeads, you can view their product lists here. In addition to face wash, Rochman says microbeads are also used in goods like toothpaste, toilet bowl cleaners and other cleaning products.

有個倡導團體也用"打擊柔珠顆粒"在歐洲進行類似改革. 如果你對那些產品可能含類似柔珠顆粒, 可點進連結網頁參考, 除此之外, 柔珠顆粒也可能用在牙膏, 浴室清潔劑及其他洗劑

“This is a solvable problem,” says Wilson. “There’s plenty of places in the market that have demonstrated that you can get the same effect with other materials.” Whatever substitutes the companies end up using, expect more of them to be biodegradable.

這是個可解決的問題, 在這產業可看到很多實例, 可用其他成份達到同樣效果的例證, 不管大廠大公司最後用了什麼替代原料, 最好都是能自動生物分解掉的...