Goodbye to glitter. The European Commission (EC) has decided – after several years of studying it – to ban the sale of this decorative product that is used in all types of areas: from the little ones in manual work in class, to young people in makeup for festival looks or designers and fashion professionals in their clothing collections.
This is because its composition is based on microplastics, plastic particles of less than five millimeters that are insoluble and cannot degrade quickly, which is why they are harmful to the environment.
mid october
The ban on the sale of powder glitter was settled last Monday, September 25 and will be implemented from October 17. The first measures against its distribution will begin to be applied when the restriction comes into force, within 20 days.
Even so, the Community Executive has reported in a statement that exceptions and transition periods will be applied so that those affected adapt to the new rules, in the event that these are “duly justified.”
42,000 tons
This restriction has been approved by the European Commission and adopted in the Regulation on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemical Substances (REACH). In general terms, this regulation's main objective is to “improve the protection of human health and the environment against the risk that the manufacturing, marketing and use of chemical substances and mixtures may entail,” it states in its official report.
Among these substances are microplastics, “particles of synthetic polymers smaller than five millimeters that are organic, insoluble and resistant to degradation,” defines the EC, of which it is estimated that 42,000 tons are released in the European Union each. anus. These are “intentionally added to products”, so the new standards adopted “will prevent the release of approximately half a million tons of microplastics into the environment.”
Furthermore, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) asked the EC to assess the risk posed by microplastics intentionally added to products so that certain restrictions could be adopted.. “The ECHA scientific committees analyzed the case and concluded that microplastics are released into the environment in an uncontrolled manner” which is why they recommended restricting them, they point out in the statement.
The marine ecosystem is the most damaged
Microplastics are a cause of concern in the environment since they do not biodegrade and, therefore, cannot be eliminated. Animals, among which marine species stand out—such as sponges, corals and even some whales and sharks—are the ones that accumulate the most microplastics because they ingest them without realizing it.. The plastic product mixes with the phytoplankton that many of them feed on and enters their digestive system.
But microplastics are not only found in the marine ecosystem, but also in “freshwater ecosystems and terrestrial ecosystems, as well as in food and drinking water,” says the statement, which explains, in turn, that this release contributes to “the permanent contamination of ecosystems and food chains.”
Image of a nacra sanctuary at the bottom of the sea. CARM/FILE
Therefore, the microplastics that animals collect in their bodies also reach humans and are distributed throughout the organs, tissues and liquids, especially the lungs, blood and breast milk.
This is why exposure to microplastics in laboratory studies has been linked, in short, to a “series of negative (eco)toxic and physical effects on living organisms.”
Reduce emissions by 30%
The goal of this measure is to “reduce intentional microplastic emissions from as many products as possible”. This proposal is included in the report of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agreed upon by the member countries of the European Commission and is also included in the European Green Deal and the new Action Plan for the Circular Economy.
In the 'Zero Pollution Action Plan' – within the Action Plan for the Circular Economy – (2021) the Commission established the objective of reducing microplastic pollution by 30% “by 2030”.
“As part of these efforts, the Commission is working to reduce microplastic pollution from plastic waste and litter, accidental and unintentional releases (e.g. loss of pellets, tire degradation or release from clothing), as well as as intentional uses in products,” they detail in the report.
Cosmetics, detergents…. also prohibited
Apart from glitter powder, there is a list of products that contain microplastics in their chemical composition and, therefore, are affected by this ban.. These are:
- The granular filler material in synthetic sports surfaces.
- Cosmetics in which microplastics are used for multiple uses such as exfoliation (microspheres)
- Detergents
- Softeners
- Fertilizers
- Phytosanitary products
- Toys
- Medicines
- Medical devices
However, its sales ban will apply after a longer transitional period than that of glitter, “in order to give interested parties time to adapt to the new rules and look for alternatives,” explains the European institution.
For example, in the case of cosmetics that do not contain microspheres, the ban on their sale will apply after a period of 4 to 12 years, as detailed in the report.. This will depend on “the complexity of the product, the need for reformulation and the availability of suitable alternatives”. Regarding granular filler material in synthetic sports surfaces, the EC reports that its ban “will apply after a period of eight years in order to give the owners and managers of playing fields the necessary time to change to other alternatives and allow the majority of existing sports grounds to reach the end of their useful life.
For the other products, the approximate time it will take to ban them is not yet known, so we will have to wait for the subsequent communications that the European Commission publishes in reference to this, and which, as they have detailed, will do so “before the end of 2023”.
Products that are not affected
The prohibition on the sale of products that contain microplastics in their composition does not apply to:
- Products that contain microplastics, but do not release them.
- Products in which the release of microplastics can be reduced to a minimum: construction materials.
- Products used in industrial areas.
- Products already regulated by other EU legislation: some medicines, food and feed.
- Products to which microplastics have not been intentionally added, but which contain them unintentionally: mud or compost.
Even if they remain outside the ban, their manufacturers will have to notify the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) each year of the estimated emissions of microplastics from these products and devise different procedures on how to use and dispose of the product. product to reduce this transmission.
Years of debate
This decision has not arisen nor has it been thought of from one day to the next. In May 2021, the Commission already adopted the 'Zero Pollution Action Plan', with which it set the goal of reducing microplastic pollution by 30% by 2030.
Furthermore, ECHA presented this restriction dossier to the European institution on three occasions through a call for data in 2018, the consultation on the Annex XV restriction dossier in 2019 and the consultation on the draft opinion of the Socio-economic Analysis Committee in 2020 (July-August).
For this reason, the EC prepared this restriction proposal that has already been approved by the EU countries and has successfully passed the control of the European Parliament and the Council before its adoption.
The alternative: biodegradable glitter
Although the ban on glitter has worried a large part of the population, who have shared their sadness and even indignation through social networks, all is not lost. And there are alternatives to this 'brilli-brilli' that can be used, since they are not harmful to the environment.
One of them is the one distributed by the Bilbao troupe group Pinpilinpauxa. This musical group distributed more than 100 kilograms of its own biodegradable glitter at the last celebration of Aste Nagusia (the Semana Grande de Bilbao), reports El Correo. The change required a significant financial effort because the price is higher, but it was necessary. We are very aware of conserving the environment,” they explained to the aforementioned media, stating that they agree with the decision of the ban, which is harmful: “We are very close to the estuary and we were worried about contaminating it.”
This glitter is usually composed of materials of plant origin, among which cellulose crystals stand out.. In fact, a team of scientists from the University of Cambridge already designed this product in 2021. Defined as a “sustainable, non-toxic, vegan and biodegradable glitter”, the particles it is made of are designed to reflect light, so that they generate a shine similar to that of glitter, but without having to use microplastics to do so. includes the study shared in the journal Nature Materials.
In addition, the crystals come from seaweed and mineral pigments, so this type of glitter does not contaminate the environment, it is biodegradable and, if it reaches the sea, it would be returning to its place of origin.