LETTER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Towards a feasible and representative

Joint effort among research infrastructures to pan-African research infrastructure
network for GHG observations
quantify the impact of plastic debris in the ocean Ana López-Ballesteros, Johannes Beck,
Antonio Bombelli et al.

- Analysis of sources and composition of

To cite this article: Diarmuid Ó Conchubhair et al 2019 Environ. Res. Lett. 14 065001 marine debris in western and southern
Aceh, Indonesia
R Fitria, F Diana, E Riani et al.

- Marine debris monitoring in the coastal

area of the District of Banyuwangi,
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Indonesia: Characterization of the debris
type and composition
E. Nurhayati, B.V. Tangahu, I.R. Mahardini
et al.

This content was downloaded from IP address 189.18.7.23 on 31/07/2023 at 18:08

 Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 065001 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab17ed

LETTER

Joint effort among research infrastructures to quantify the impact of

OPEN ACCESS
plastic debris in the ocean
RECEIVED
29 May 2018
Diarmuid Ó Conchubhair1,5 , Deirdre Fitzhenry1, Amy Lusher2 , Andrew L King2, Tim van Emmerik4 ,
REVISED
3 April 2019
Laurent Lebreton4, Constanza Ricaurte-Villota3 , Luisa Espinosa3 and Eleanor O’Rourke1
1
Marine Institute (MI) Ireland
ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION
10 April 2019
2
Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Norway
3
INVEMAR, Colombia
PUBLISHED 4
22 May 2019
The Ocean Cleanup, The Netherlands
5
Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.

Original content from this

E-mail: diarmuid.oconchubhair@marine.ie
work may be used under
the terms of the Creative Keywords: ocean, monitoring, litter, environment, microplastic, research, infrastructures
Commons Attribution 3.0
licence.
Any further distribution of
this work must maintain Abstract
attribution to the
author(s) and the title of
Marine debris is one of the most significant problems facing the marine environment, endangering
the work, journal citation wildlife, polluting oceans and is an issue which holds global significance. Plastics constitute a large
and DOI.
proportion of marine debris, and their persistence can cause a number of negative consequences for
biota and the environment, including entanglement and ingestion, which can lead to mortality. Most
plastics never biodegrade and instead break down into smaller pieces which are more difficult to
monitor and eventually become so small (micro and nanoplastics), that they are challenging to observe
or intercept in the ocean. Marine-based Research Infrastructures (RIs) monitor several environmental
parameters and are situated around the globe; however, none of these are routinely monitoring marine
debris or plastics. Currently, the only infrastructures in place with regard to marine debris are ‘physical
debris interception infrastructure’ in the form of barriers constructed to prevent marine debris from
entering the ocean. Several knowledge gaps and restraints exist within current in situ infrastructure
including technological immaturity, diverse methodologies and lack of data harmonisation. Never-
theless, marine RIs could monitor microplastics within the water column on a long-term basis and
initial steps towards developing technology are promising.

1. Introduction was conducted by COOP+ partners in combination

with surveys, both online as well as direct interviews
Cooperation of Research Infrastructures to address with RI operators, to determine what global challenges
global challenges in the environmental field (COOP+) should be addressed by the COOP+ consortium. This
is a European Commission (EC) funded project, which list was used to analyse where RIs can participate, col-
aims to strengthen links and promote cooperation laborate and play a significant role within their desig-
between European Research Infrastructures (RIs) and nated global challenge. Marine debris, including
their international counterparts on other continents. plastics and microplastics was identified as a sig-
The COOP+ project focuses on the identification of nificant global challenge (International Council for
global challenges, global cooperation, coordination of the Exploration of the Sea 2017), where a joint effort
international integrated platforms and the promotion among marine RIs to monitor and quantify micro-
of best practice/efficient knowledge transfer plastics in the marine environment is required.
between RIs. Marine debris can be made up of a variety of com-
A list of global challenges was compiled by the pounds, i.e. wood, metals, glass etc, although plastic
COOP+ project to assess how global collaboration appears to contribute to a significantly large propor-
between RIs could be fostered to further the monitor- tion of this debris. Once plastic enters the marine
ing of environmental challenges. A literature review environment, it is persistent and durable nature

© 2019 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd

Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 065001

presents a significant risk to ecosystem from coastal the amount and distribution of plastic, with a focus on
areas to the deep sea. Plastic has become a serious microplastics, in the oceans. This paper reviews the
threat to marine life as it can be ingested and/or cause current ability of RIs to monitor plastic is addressed
entanglement, which can lead to mortality. This along with technology and knowledge gaps. Finally, it
anthropogenic material also smoothers benthic habi- outlines the requirement for further cooperation
tats, can act as artificial substrate for colonisation and between RIs, as well as between RIs and sensor manu-
transport invasive species between continents factures to develop dedicated, long-term microplastic
(Gregory 2009). monitoring systems.
Subsequently, plastic marine debris has been iden-
tified as one of the most significant problems facing
the marine environment today (STAP 2011). Plastics 2. Research infrastructures
are persistent as a pollutant and impact on the
environment and biota is now a major concern. As The European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastruc-
plastics persist in the environment, they become tures (ESFRI) defines RIs as ‘facilities, resources or
weathered through photodegradation by UV light as services of a unique nature, identified by European
well as from wind and wave action. This exposure cau- research communities to conduct and to support top-
ses chemical bonds to weaken and plastic to become level research activities in their domains.’ RIs can also
brittle and breakdown. As plastic fragments it pro- be defined as anything with institutional, national, or
duces microplastics. Furthermore, as chemical bonds multi-country funding. Consequently, ESFRI and
of plastic polymers weaken, toxic compounds are non-ESFI will be defined as RIs within the scope of this
released into the ocean, which may have a detrimental work, along with referencing projects such as JERICO,
effect on marine ecosystems (Romera-Castillo et al which is an EU-funded infrastructure project. Most
2018). infrastructures are mature, have been deployed for 5
The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administra- years, monitor a variety of environmental parameters
tion (National Ocean Service 2018) defines micro- and have the ability to expand or integrate new sensors
plastics as anything <2.5 cm in size (Lippiatt et al and technologies. Marine RIs have a global distribu-
2013), however, microplastics are also defined as tion and are located within the water column, either at
<5 mm (Arthur et al 2009), or 1 mm in size by the sci- the surface, bottom mounted or somewhere in
entific community (Browne et al 2011). The con- between. Some marine RIs are fixed point, such as
temporary definition of a microplastic is anything in situ marine observatories; whereas others can either
smaller than 1mm but the variation in sizing classifica- move freely within the water column or drift with
tion is one of the primary methodologies that should ocean currents, such as Argo profiling floats.
be standardised globally. Regardless of the definition The European Multidisciplinary Seafloor and
used, the smaller the microplastics, the harder they are water-column Observatory (EMSO) and European
to observe by the human eye. This observation Argo programme (EURO-ARGO) are both recognised
requires microscopes or optical sensing technology to European Research Infrastructure Consortia (ERICs).
measure/monitor abundance. Not all microplastics These marine ERICs monitor various marine environ-
are formed from the breakdown of larger particles in mental parameters with EMSO dedicated to fixed
the environment, some are formed from the break- point observing and Argo floats moving both up and
down during use, whereas others, termed primary down the water column (between the surface and
microplastics, are initially manufactured in small sizes 2000 m), but also spatially floating with wind and
(Cole et al 2011). ocean currents. These ERICs are supported by addi-
A significant amount of debris enters the ocean tional RI projects such as the Joint European Research
every year, with sources identified both on land and at Infrastructure Network for Coastal Observatories
sea (Sheavly and Register 2007) and the accumulation (JERICO), which focuses on the coastal part of a future
of plastics in the environment has been estimated to be version of the European Ocean Observing System
between 15 and 51 trillion microplastic particles (Van (EOOS), and includes monitoring infrastructure such
Sebille et al 2015). The large volume of plastic in the as fixed point including shallow-water observatories,
marine environment, coupled with the potentially data buoys, high frequency radar and mobile infra-
detrimental consequences it has on marine life, has structure (including gliders and FerryBox platforms).
fuelled global motivation to address the issue of mar- Additionally, INTAROS (Integrated Arctic Observa-
ine plastics in order to ensure a cleaner and safer ocean tion Systems; Horizon 2020) includes pan-Arctic
for future generations. monitoring infrastructure that covers the ocean, cryo-
RIs present a unique opportunity where through sphere, atmosphere, and terrestrial sphere.
global cooperation, efficient knowledge transfer of As plastics and microplastics in the marine
best practises and coordinated international efforts environment are a global issue, this problem cannot be
may be used to monitor and assess marine plastic pol- solved by European infrastructure alone. For example,
lution. Therefore, the aim of this manuscript is to the Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) between
understand the role that RIs can play in monitoring Ocean Network Canada (ONC) and EMSO formalises

2
Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 065001

a collaborative relationship between both marine developers to integrate such systems within their spe-
observing RIs and will develop joint efforts to deliver cific RI. Technological development at this scale
high‐quality, continuous data for environmental pro- requires a significant amount of dedicated funding via
tection (Conti 2018). Euro-Argo also contributes to specific mechanisms including but not limited to:
the international Argo programme, which is part of
the Global Climate Observing System (GOOS). • Europe: Horizon 2020, Horizon Europe and
Interreg (European Regional Development Funding
(ERDF)), ERA-NET, MarTERA, NERC (UK)
3. RIs and their role in monitoring plastic
debris • International: National Science Foundation (NSF)
United States (US), African Academy of Sciences
Plastics can enter the ocean in a variety of ways ranging (AAS) Weather and Climate information SERvices
from indirect sources such as coastal landfill runoff, for Africa (WISER) and the Africa Climate Policy
wind-blown landfill waste, litter washed into drains, Centre (ACPC) (Africa), the Marine and Coastal
rivers and lakes; through to accidental input (for Research funding instrument (South Africa),
example large containers being washed overboard National Environmental Science Program (NESP),
cargo vessels while in transit), to direct and intentional Australia.
input via illegal dumping. To put this into perspective,
Jambeck et al 2015 estimated that ∼275 million metric This financial support should be short-to-medium
tons (MT) of plastic waste were created during 2010, term to initially speed up the technology development
and between 4.8 and 12.7 million MT of this ended up and facilitate integration across various RIs.
in the ocean. More recent studies estimated the plastic As reported by Hopewell et al (2009) the trend for
emission from rivers into the oceans was between 1.15 plastic recycling is increasing, which is encouraging;
and 2.41 million MT (Lebreton et al 2017) and 0.41–4 however, the continued exponential increase in plastic
million MT (Schmidt et al 2017). The significant use and production highlights the need to understand
volume of plastics flowing into the marine environ- the consequences. Marine RIs have the potential to
ment presents the need to monitor their release and play a major role in monitoring plastics in the future.
transport via ocean circulation, tides, and thermo- Baseline investigations have shown promising
clines (Eriksen et al 2013). Ocean currents can also advancements utilising FerryBox systems to monitor
carry marine debris into coastal areas and onto microplastics (NorSOOP Project, funded by the Nor-
beaches, polluting coastlines and ports. wegian Research Council).
The European Space Agency (ESA) funded project Novel technology, which may be integrated onto
OptiMAL (Optical methods for MArine Litter detec- marine RIs, is currently being developed albeit at very
tion), reviewed different observational scenarios for early stage via the COMMONSENSE project (an EU
marine litter detection, focussing on optical remote FP7 funded project developing cost-effective sensors,
sensing techniques. Satellite/remote sensing technol- interoperable with international existing ocean obser-
ogy can only monitor large debris including plastics at ving systems, to meet EU policies requirements). The
the surface of the ocean or along the coastline and can- project is testing a pump that pulls through sea-water
not penetrate into the water column. Furthermore, and measures the amount of microplastics in the water
satellites are not currently able to monitor micro- sample which is based on a suggestion presented by
plastics as new technology is required to monitor par- researchers from Ireland (Lusher et al 2014, 2015).
ticles of this size. A combination of remote sensing This project is synonymous to the integration of a
technology as well as water column observations ( microplastic sampler within FerryBox systems. Tech-
in situ observatories and mobile platforms) would nology such as this, once it has matured to a sufficient
provide a whole scale overview of plastics and micro- TRL, could then be integrated into some marine RIs.
plastics in the ocean. This puts RIs in a well-situated Knowledge and awareness on the potential harm
position to address the current limitations of satellites of plastics, primarily microplastics, to the marine
and remote sensing technology. environment, as well as to humans through consump-
At present there is a lack of monitoring technology tion has been brought before governments with the
within standalone marine RIs which is hampering the hope of forming new policies. Policy is an important
monitoring of microplastics. Optical technology is driver and RIs have the potential to inform policy as
needed to identify particles smaller than 1 mm, this is well as decision makers regarding current status of
currently laking or unsuitable for some fixed and plastic and microplastic pollution.
mobile marine observing platforms. Microplastic
monitoring is possible in laboratories on-board ships 3.1. Identification of requirements
as well as on land. However, there is currently a lack of Considerable technological (equipment/sensor) gaps
technology mature enough to carry out this monitor- remain in order to monitor plastic in the marine
ing autonomously in a marine environment. Estab- environment. Remote sensing is currently limited to
lished RIs should be working with technology assessing floating debris at the surface and to debris of

3
Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 065001

a large size (e.g. shipping containers). In situ monitor- for monitoring marine litter, which the human eye can
ing is carried out using nets, trawls and beach clean- see, however it is limited when monitoring smaller
ups and it is this kind of multi-faceted approach that is items such as microplastics.
required to tackle the problem of marine litter (Ryan
et al 2009). In situ RIs have the potential to provide 3.3. Future scenarios
autonomous long-term monitoring, which would also ESFRI funded RIs for monitoring marine plastic debris
provide crucial data along with the manual systems are still lacking the monitoring technology for integra-
already in place. tion onto the existing infrastructure. Monitoring
Technological advancement in the area of optical technology is not yet at a technology readiness level
sensing could see optical monitoring as one of the pri- (TRL- used for estimating maturity of a new technol-
mary tools in terms of microplastic monitoring within ogy and therefore how far/close it is to market
the marine environment. Further developments need deployment) to allow for integration into in situ RIs
to take place within the research field, which would such as EMSO, OOI (Ocean Observatories Initiative)
also then require a marinisation add-on development or Argo. Current technologies (optical sensing for
for deployment at sea. Specific requirements for any example) are either too large and/or power intensive
device deployed in the marine environment include: to be integrated onto in situ RIs. Remote sensing
infrastructures are currently assessing whether satellite
• Calibration (How long can a device be left at sea detection/monitoring can be used to monitor marine
without calibration?) debris (such as containers and ghost ships) but again,
• Operation and Maintenance (What maintenance this technology is also at early stage and can only
intervals are associated with the device?) monitor relatively large items (such as those listed
above) at the ocean surface. Mid-infrared spectrosc-
• Power (What are the power demands of the device?) opy technique was developed to analyse microplastics
with high precision but this technology is relatively
All of the above will influence the distribution of expensive and the cost may prove prohibitive for many
any device, how long it can be left deployed for and on countries.
what types of platforms it can be deployed on. Calibra-
tion, as well as operations and maintenance will have a
direct impact on integration and running costs as ves- 3.4. Specific aspects addressed by RIs
sels, remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and divers are RIs require up-to-date reviews with technological
required for the installation, removal (for calibration) developers on any advances in the area of marine
plastic monitoring. Collaboration between RIs and
and maintenance (removal of marine growth) of any
device deployed at sea. Power determines what type of marine plastic organisations should be initiated
platform a device can be deployed on as if it uses a rela- (ENVRI+, a Horizon 2020 project bringing together
tively high amount of power then it would be limited Environmental and Earth System Research Infrastruc-
tures, projects and networks and similar initiatives)
to platforms that have a cabled supply of power.
and host regular meetings for RIs. These meetings
could include a section where technological devel-
3.2. Case study: increase of litter at the Arctic deep- opers have a forum to update RIs on the current status
sea observatory HAUSGARTEN (Bergmann and of their technologies as well as future steps and
Klages 2012). timelines associated with their respective technology.
In 1999 the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and It is imperative that there are open discussions
Marine Research (AWI), established a deep-sea obser- between marine plastic monitoring organisations, RIs,
vatory ‘HAUSGARTEN’ in the Fram Strait, North and technology developers and a co-development
Atlantic (Soltwedel et al 2005). During 2002, a towed approach is in place to ensure that commercially ready
camera track was established at a depth of 2500 m at products will provide the data required for fit-for-
the HAUSGARTEN observatory. This track was purpose monitoring and can be easily integrated into
revisited in 2004, 2007 and 2011. During the camera various RIs.
tow, images were taken at intervals of either 30 s or
50 s and any shape which could be identified with 90%
certainty as human waste were marked as litter 4. Gap analysis
(Bergmann and Klages 2012). This study was one of
the projects to present long-term monitoring data Currently there is a gap between monitoring technol-
related to marine litter on the deep seafloor and ogy and existing RIs. Marine RIs are in place, but
although it cannot be discounted that some of the litter monitoring technology is at a low maturity level and is
may have been counted twice over the various track currently not suitable for integration onto the RIs.
years there was still more litter counted that what was Harmonisation of marine plastic monitoring and data
expected for a remote site, such as HAUSGARTEN collection and data formatting are also issues. Three
(Bergmann and Klages 2012). This technique is good main tasks are outlined below along with an overview

4
Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 065001

of how they can be used to drive collaboration between • Sensor/Equipment Calibration: there is a cost
RIs as well as the main actors involved in each task. associated with removal and replacement of equip-
ment in subsea and often-remote environments (i.e.
4.1. Task 1—monitoring methods quality of data if instrument out of calibration).
4.1.1. Description
• Biofouling and marine growth on sensor if deployed
The primary focus should be on the harmonisation of
in an area of high productivity. Cost associated with
existing monitoring methods. As new methods are
sending divers or ROVs to clean growth from
created, the more difficult it is to harmonise between
instruments.
the various different methods already in use. This is
why BASEMAN, a JPI-Oceans funded project aimed at • Power requirements—if instruments are deployed
defining the baselines and standards for microplastics on an observatory with cabled power supply then
analyses in European waters, and similar objectives for this is less of an issue. However, to ensure maximum
RIs are important. BASEMAN’s primary goal was to deployment of instrumentation within the marine
review, compare and evaluate all existing methodology environment then the device should have a low
in terms of marine plastic sampling and identification power-draw allowing for deployment on remote
and propose a harmonised approach going forward. buoys, marine platforms and possibly Argo profiling
Similar initiatives have been followed, including a floats.
workshop on the analysis of microplastics, hosted by
Quality Assurance of Information for Marine Envir-
onmental Monitoring in Europe (QUASIMEME) 4.2.2. Type
(QUASIMEME 2018). The aim being improving the Data collection, Experimental Research,
quality and reliability of analysis as well as achieving Interoperability
better harmonization of microplastics data. The Japa-
nese government has taken a lead role in harmonising
the methods used to monitor microplastics in the 4.2.3. Actors involved and their role
ocean. In 2016, the Japanese Ministry for the Environ- With the development of optical sensing for subsea
ment launched their project of ‘Harmonization of monitoring there are significant amounts of RIs (both
Marine Microplastics Monitoring Methodologies,’ (Japa- ESFRI and non-ESFRI defined infrastructures) cap-
nese National Ministry 2018). Such initiatives must be able of hosting these monitoring devices, examples of
amalgamated to ensure harmonisation between insti- such include:
tutions, projects and governments on an international
scale. • EMSO ERIC: is a large-scale European distributed
Research Infrastructure for ocean observation,
4.1.2. Type enabling real-time interactive long-term monitor-
Data harmonisation, Data Collection, Interoperability ing of ocean processes and is a recognised ERIC.
• OOI: is based across Northern and Southern
4.1.3. Actors involved and their role Americas, is an integrated infrastructure pro-
BASEMAN, Japanese Ministry for the Environment, gramme composed of science driven platforms and
QUASIMEME and similar harmonisation organisa- sensor systems.
tions/projects play a crucial role in the harmonisation
of marine plastic sampling and identification. • JAMSTEC: The Japan Agency for Marine-Earth
Science and Technology, or JAMSTEC, is a Japanese
4.2. Task 2—data collection national research institute for marine-earth science
4.2.1. Description and technology and has marine platforms within
Data are collected using a variety of methods including Japanese territory and territorial waters.
satellite (larger debris), in situ sampling (nets, trawls, • Euro-Argo ERIC: 12 European countries within the
beach clean-ups etc) and increasingly, towards the Euro-Argo project with a common aim to provide
development of optical monitoring of marine plastic an optimized and sustained European contribution
as well as software analytics using video footage via
to Argo by deploying 250 floats per year, and is a
airborne drones etc. There can be harmonisation
recognised ERIC.
issues: some nets used to collect microplastics may
have larger or smaller mesh sizes; and quantification • Other non-ESFRI RIs.
methods on beach clean-up can often be personal and
• National ocean RIs (Research Vessels etc).
sizing can be ‘rough estimations,’ (i.e. measurements
taken using estimations instead of correct measuring • Oil and Gas companies.
instrumentation). Specific issues also surround the
• Marine test site operators.
deployment of any device in a subsea environment
including: • Local and national governments.

5
Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 065001

4.3. Task 3—data modelling monitoring of microplastics once the monitoring

4.3.1. Description equipment have been developed.
Simulating or modelling the transport of floating
marine debris requires a detailed understanding of
oceanic processes as well as an in-depth understanding
6. Conclusion
of what happens marine plastic in the marine environ-
RIs play a key role in monitoring a variety of
ment. Modelling of plastic transport also must factor
environmental parameters and need to be kept up-to-
in processes such as freshwater input, coastal oceano-
date with technological advances in the area of marine
graphy as well as deep-water oceanography including
plastic monitoring. Collaboration between RIs and
oceanic gyres.
organisations dedicated to understanding, monitoring
and removing marine plastic should be initiated
4.3.2. Type (ENVRI+ and similar initiatives could act as a facilita-
Modelling, Data collection, Interoperability, Exper- tion platform) and regular collaborative meetings
imental Research, Dissemination. should be planned between RIs focusing on collabora-
tion between RIs, methodology and data harmonisa-
4.3.3. Actors involved and their role tion, as well as technological innovation in terms of
monitoring equipment. These meetings could also act
• Copernicus Marine Environment Monitoring Ser- as a forum where technology developers update, and
vice (CMEMS): uses data from both satellite and build collaborations with, both marine plastic organi-
in situ observations—using the data to provide sations and RIs on the current status of their technol-
analyses and forecasts on a daily basis. This analysis ogies as well as future steps and timelines associated
then enables scientists to monitor, understand and with their respective technology. RIs can help drive
forecast the marine environment. Mercator Ocean this technological innovation, either by small research
is a privately owned, not-for-profit French company funding calls and/or by driving funding policy devel-
which provides analysis and forecasting services for opment at EC and global levels to support these types
CMEMS (Mercator is contracted by CMEMS). of monitoring technologies. It is imperative that there
Scientists and researchers have already begun to use are open discussions between marine plastic monitor-
the existing data/models to enhance and develop ing organisations, RIs, and technology developers and
their models in terms of provide new and improved a co-development approach is in place to ensure the
models for marine debris at the sea surface. end-products will provide the data required for fit-for-
purpose monitoring that can be easily integrated into
various RIs. A major driver in terms of global
5. Existing and future RIs: requirements monitoring with regard to marine plastics will be
through collaborative research projects, such as joint
At present, few of the marine RIs are monitoring monitoring programs (i.e. EMSO case study as out-
marine debris or have the ability to monitor marine lined above).
plastics. Although the majority of RIs do have the RIs need to collaborate internationally as marine
capability (already in situ, varying degrees of power microplastics is a global issue. International collabora-
availability, spare port/plug-in capacity) to monitor tion across RIs and via a multi-RI approach (i.e. satel-
marine plastics, there is no mature technology (sensor lite remote sensing in combination with in situ and
or equipment) available or at a TRL mature enough to mobile autonomous marine platforms) would provide
deploy onto RIs. The distribution (both European and a holistic approach to the monitoring of marine
on a global basis) and locations (at sea surface, within microplastics. As camera technology and optical sen-
the water column and at the seafloor) of marine RIs sing technologies develop (becoming smaller and less
provide infrastructure in key locations for the poten- power intensive) these technologies can be integrated
tial future monitoring of microplastics in the marine into marine observing platforms allowing for more
environment. Marine RIs have shown that their plat- detailed and accurate measurements with regard to the
forms are future proof (for example EMSO’s EGIM abundance of plastics and microplastics in the marine
(EMSO Generic Instrument Module, an observatory environment.
designed by EMSO partners, which has spare ports RIs have the potential to play a significant role in
available for the deployment and/or trial of new the monitoring of microplastics. Monitoring is only
sensors and equipment). Some EMSO regional nodes one aspect in terms of microplastics, another aspect is
also provide this capacity and are willing to trial new the removal of existing plastics already in the ocean
marine technology as it becomes available. The (e.g. beach clean-ups) however the most significant
European Argo Programme (Euro-Argo) is developing driver in the reduction of plastics from the marine
biogeochemical (BGC) floats as well as profiling floats environment will have to come from a policy orien-
for the deep ocean. Marine RIs such as these can tated solution. There is currently a general awareness
therefore provide the infrastructure required for the of the potential harmful plastics, in particular,

6
Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 065001

microplastics may have on the marine environment Hopewell J, Dvorak R and Kosior E 2009 Plastics recycling:
and this is being brought before governments and will challenges and opportunities Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364
2115–26
form new policies into the future. Public mind-sets are
International Council for the Exploaration of the Sea 2017
also beginning to change, and this could play a sig- FEATURE ARTICLE—Marine litter and monitoring
nificant role in terms of limiting point source entry of (https://ices.dk/news-and-events/news-archive/news/
plastics into the marine environment. This change in Pages/FEATURE%20ARTICLE%20%E2%80%93%
20Marine%20litter%20and%20monitoring.aspx) (Accessed:
behaviour is slow and must be nurtured and developed
2 February 2018)
by governments with initiatives such as added tax on Jambeck J, Geyer R, Wilcox C, Siegler T, Perryman M, Andrady A,
single use plastics with this income used to facilitate Narayan R and Law K 2015 Plastic waste inputs from land
programmes and initiatives to educate the public, into the ocean Science 347 768–71
Japanese National Ministry 2018 Harmonization of Microplastics
fund monitoring as well as clean-up programmes.
Monitoring Methodologies in the Ocean [MOE] (https://
env.go.jp/en/water/marine_litter/method.html) (Accessed:
2 February 2018)
ORCID iDs Lebreton L, van der Zwet J, Damsteeg J, Slat B, Andrady A and
Reisser J 2017 River plastic emissions to the world’s oceans
Diarmuid Ó Conchubhair https://orcid.org/0000- Nat. Commun. 8 15611
0003-2239-4736 Lippiatt S, Opfer S and Arthur C 2013 Marine Debris Monitoring and
Assessment NOS-OR&R-46 NOAA Technical Memorandum
Amy Lusher https://orcid.org/0000-0003- Lusher A, Burke A, O’Connor I and Officer R 2014 Microplastic
0539-2974 pollution in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean: validated and
Tim van Emmerik https://orcid.org/0000-0002- opportunistic sampling Mar. Pollut. Bull. 88 325–33
4773-9107 Lusher A, Tirelli V, O’Connor I and Officer R 2015 Microplastics in
Arctic polar waters: the first reported values of particles in
Constanza Ricaurte-Villota https://orcid.org/ surface and sub-surface samples Sci. Rep. 5 14947
0000-0003-1554-4994 National Ocean Service 2018 What are microplastics? (https://
oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html) (Accessed:
14 August 2018)
References QUASIMEME 2018 The first QUASIMEME Workshop on Analysis
of Microplastics (http://www.quasimeme.org/gfx_content/
Arthur C, Baker J and Bamford H (ed) 2009 Proc. Int. Research
documents/Flyer%20QUASIMEME%20first%
Workshop on the Occurrence, Effects and Fate of Microplastic
20worldwide%20workshop%20on%20microplastics.pdf)
Marine Debris (9-11 September 2008(NOAA Technical
(Accessed: 2 February 2019)
Memorandum) NOS-OR&R-30
Romera-Castillo C, Pinto M, Langer T, Álvarez-Salgado X and
Bergmann M and Klages M 2012 Increase of litter at the Arctic deep-
Herndl G 2018 Dissolved organic carbon leaching from
sea observatory HAUSGARTEN Mar. Pollut. Bull. 64
plastics stimulates microbial activity in the ocean (https://
2734–41
rdcu.be/4B4o) (Accessed: 8 August 2018)
Browne M, Crump P, Niven S, Teuten E, Tonkin A, Galloway T and
Ryan P, Moore C, van Franeker J and Moloney C 2009 Monitoring
Thompson R 2011 Accumulation of microplastic on
the abundance of plastic debris in the marine environment
shorelines woldwide: sources and sinks Environ. Sci. Technol.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364 1999–2012
45 9175–9
Schmidt C, Krauth T and Wagner S 2017 Export of plastic debris by
Cole M, Lindeque P, Halsband C and Galloway T 2011
rivers into the sea Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 12246–53
Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A
Sheavly S B and Register K M 2007 Marine debris & plastics:
review Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62 2588–97
environmental concerns, sources, impacts and solutions
Conti F 2018 Ocean Networks Canada and EMSO ERIC sign
J. Polym. Environ. 15 301–5
Memorandum of Understanding EMSO (http://emso.eu/
Soltwedel T et al 2005 HAUSGARTEN: multidisciplinary
2018/05/30/ocean-networks-canada-and-emso-eric-sign-
investigations at a deep-sea, long-term observatory in the
memorandum-of-understanding/) (Accessed: 14 Janu-
Arctic Ocean Oceanography 18 46–61
ary 2018)
STAP 2011 Marine Debris as a Global Environmental Problem:
Eriksen M, Maximenko N, Thiel M, Cummins A, Lattin G,
Introducing a solutions based framework focused on plastic.
Wilson S, Hafner J, Zellers A and Rifman S 2013 Plastic
A STAP Information Document (Washington, DC: Global
pollution in the South Pacific subtropical gyre Mar. Pollut.
Environment Facility) (http://stapgef.org/sites/default/
Bull. 68 71–6
files/stap/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Marine-Debris.
Gregory M 2009 Environmental implications of plastic debris in
pdf) (Accessed: 12 February 2019)
marine settings—entanglement, ingestion, smothering,
Van Sebille E, Wilcox C, Lebreton L, Maximenko N, Hardesty B,
hangers-on, hitch-hiking and alien invasions Phil. Tran. R.
van Franeker J, Eriksen M, Siegel D, Galgani F and Law K
Soc. B 364 2013–25
2015 A global inventory of small floating plastic debris
Environ. Res. Lett. 10 124006