INTERVIEW WITH ANDREJ KRZAN, FROM NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY

 

Andrej Krzan is a Senior Scientific Associate at the Slovenian Kemijski Inštitut (National Institute of Chemistry). He oversees the tasks that intend to assess the environmental impacts of different strategies to make plastic food packaging more efficient, focusing on waste generation, pollution, and chemical emissions’ effects on ecosystems and selected species.

 

What are the main impacts that plastic pollution has on the environment?

Plastic pollution has several significant impacts on the environment. It physically threatens wildlife, especially marine animals, which often ingest plastic debris or become entangled in it, leading to injury or death. This disrupts ecosystems and food chains. As a long-term consequence, this can lead to declines in species populations resulting in biodiversity loss. In turn, this makes ecosystems less resilient to climate change and anthropogenic pressures. Due to their different size scales macro-litter, microplastics and nanoplastics will have different effects. Especially the fate and effects of nanoplastic particles (sizes below one micrometre) are not yet well understood.

Plastics in the environment also cause chemical contamination due to the leaching of harmful chemicals into the soil and water, affecting plant and animal life. Some of these chemicals can accumulate in the food chain. Chemicals associated with plastics have recently been discovered in various parts of the human body indicating that the effect is broadly spread and is directly affecting human health.

Plastic pollution can also damage habitats, such as coral reefs, by smothering them or introducing harmful chemicals. It also has an economic impact which can be linked to aesthetic impacts – for example, degraded landscapes and polluted waters do not attract tourism, whereas negative effects on wildlife can influence industries such as fishing affecting local economies, especially in coastal areas.

 

 

• What impacts of plastic pollution are not being taken into consideration in the main messages that circulate through society? How can we generate awareness about them?
•  

What is missing from the public discourse is a serious consideration of the broadly distributed long-term consequences of plastic pollution. Often invisible effects are changing the environment and influencing us at an imperceptible rate, lulling us into a feeling that all is fine and will remain so. When we enjoy a beautiful sunny day at the beach or a delicious fish on our plate it is hard to understand that we are facing a serious problem. The situation is similar to perceptions of climate change.

The aspect of social justice is often missing from public discussions. Plastic pollution disproportionately affects marginalised communities, such as those near waste facilities or heavily polluted areas. This can lead to health disparities and reduced quality of life. Indigenous communities are also directly affected by plastic pollution in their ancestral lands and waters, which can undermine their cultural practices and livelihoods.

We must also face the fact that we currently do not have technologies which we can deploy to solve plastic pollution. For example, we have no method to extract microplastics from the environment. A blind faith that technologies will appear before we reach significant negative consequences of plastic pollution should be dispelled.

We need serious action that will significantly reduce emissions of plastics into the environment. This is not the action of an individual but must encompass policy, industry and the general public, however, all groups need commitment and a sense of urgency that is currently lacking. I fear that it will take some surprising negative effects further down the road to reach commitment for serious action.

On the other hand, it is not a time to despair. We can act however we must demand action and understand that it will require all of us to change our behaviour and practices.

 

 

• For what research purpose does the STOPP project divide the analysis of ecosystems into three main ecosystems (marine, freshwater and terrestrial)?
•  

Dividing ecosystems into marine, freshwater, and terrestrial categories is necessary since each environmental compartment has unique physical, chemical, and biological characteristics. For example, different ecosystems support distinct communities of organisms. This division allows researchers to focus on biodiversity patterns, species interactions, and trends unique to each environment.

Ecosystems also play specific roles in processes such as nutrient cycling, carbon storage, and habitat provision. Analysing them separately helps researchers understand how these functions contribute to the overall ecological health of the planet and which functions may be under threat.

Due to the profound differences between ecosystems, there will also be significant variation in the impact of human activities on the ecosystems. By separating them, we can better assess specific threats, such as overfishing in marine environments or pollution in freshwater systems and develop targeted conservation strategies. For example, we can identify vulnerable areas and species so that we can propose adaptation and mitigation strategies. Finally, an understanding of the distinct challenges and opportunities within each ecosystem will allow us to develop more effective management practices and policy frameworks tailored to the different ecosystems.