Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution (Environmental Science and Engineering) 3031517911, 9783031517914

Citation preview

Environmental Science and Engineering

Alok Prasad Das Ipsita Dipamitra Behera Narayan Prasad Das   Editors

Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution

Environmental Science and Engineering Series Editors Ulrich Förstner, Buchholz, Germany Wim H. Rulkens, Department of Environmental Technology, Wageningen, The Netherlands

The ultimate goal of this series is to contribute to the protection of our environment, which calls for both profound research and the ongoing development of solutions and measurements by experts in the field. Accordingly, the series promotes not only a deeper understanding of environmental processes and the evaluation of management strategies, but also design and technology aimed at improving environmental quality. Books focusing on the former are published in the subseries Environmental Science, those focusing on the latter in the subseries Environmental Engineering.

Alok Prasad Das · Ipsita Dipamitra Behera · Narayan Prasad Das Editors

Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution

Editors Alok Prasad Das Department of Life Sciences Rama Devi Women’s University Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

Ipsita Dipamitra Behera Department of Chemical Engineering Indira Gandhi Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

Narayan Prasad Das Department of Toxicology State Forensic Science Laboratory Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

ISSN 1863-5520 ISSN 1863-5539 (electronic) Environmental Science and Engineering ISBN 978-3-031-51791-4 ISBN 978-3-031-51792-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51792-1 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Paper in this product is recyclable.

Contents

1

Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact, and Sustainable Remediation Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ashitha K. Sanuj, N. Vanitha, P. F. Steffi, and P. F. Mishel

1

2

Synthetic Microfibres: Sources, Fate, and Toxicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chanchal Sharma, Gourav Sarkar, and Charu Dogra Rawat

3

Source, Transport, and Accumulation of Microfiber Wastes in the Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S. Charulatha and K. S. Thangamani

43

Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants from the Marine Sediments of Paradeep Coast of Bay of Bengal, India for their Sustainable Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subhashree Moharana, Sudeshna Dey, Sailaja Priyadarsini, M. Santosh Kumar, and Alok Prasad Das

57

Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants in Sediment Samples from Daya River of Odisha State in India for their Appropriate Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Godabari Pradhan, Sudeshna Dey, Sailaja Priyadarsini, M. Santosh Kumar, and Alok Prasad Das

75

4

5

6

7

Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked to Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Suman Jagatee, Sujata Priyadarshini, Chandi Charan Rath, and Alok Prasad Das

21

93

Environmental Occurrence and Contemporary Health Issues of Micro Plastics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Aditya Kishore Dash, Abanti Pradhan, and Lala Behari Sukla

v

vi

Contents

8

Synthetic Fabrics and Microfiber Pollution–An Assessment of Their Global Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Sujata Priyadarshini, Suman Jagatee, and Alok Prasad Das

9

Impacts of Microfiber Pollutants on the Global Ecosystem . . . . . . . . 159 Mahima Chakraborty, K. Shrujana, Atharva Karkhanis, R. S. Surya, Sreelakshmi R. Nair, and Subathra Devi C.

10 A Critical Review of Marine Microfiber Pollution Routes, Toxicity, and Its Sustainable Remediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189 Krishnamayee Mallick, Surajita Sahu, Aishwarya Sahu, Sudeshna Dey, and Alok Prasad Das 11 Sustainable Management and Advanced Techniques of Synthetic Microfiber Waste Through Circular Economy . . . . . . . . 213 Aswetha Iyer, Krishnanjana S. Nambiar, and S. Murugan 12 Microfiber Waste Management and Recycling with Zero Waste Adaptation Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231 Pamreishang Kasar and L. S. Songachan 13 Advanced and Smart Technology for Sustainable Management of Microfiber Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 Manisha Rao

Chapter 1

Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact, and Sustainable Remediation Process Ashitha K. Sanuj, N. Vanitha, P. F. Steffi, and P. F. Mishel

Abstract Microfiber is a synthetic fiber that is finer than one denier or decitex and has a diameter fewer than ten micrometers. The most common types of microfibers are made from a variety of polyesters, polyamides, and mixtures of polyester, polyamide, and polypropylene. Microfiber was initially created as a mass-produced, low-cost substitute for natural fibers. They are used to create a variety of items that are essential to daily living, including fabrics, ropes, household plastic bottles, and many more. Synthetic microfibers have been found in all environmental matrices, including the air, soil, rivers, lakes, and oceans. One of the main factors stressing world ecosystems is the astonishing accumulation of these synthetic fabrics. Modern urbanized populations who frequently use synthetic clothing produce more synthetic microfibers in the environment. Several scientific investigations have now shown the harmful effects of these pollutants on the aquatic food chain and human health. Because of their high rate of emission and pervasive presence in nature, the management of these synthetic fabric contaminants is crucial. For effective remediation strategies development of technology for effective removal and cleanup, social awareness campaigns, and strict government restrictions should be the main areas of concentration. This chapter provides a general idea of the microfiber sources, characteristics, impact on the environment, and remediation strategies. Keywords Microfiber · Pollution · Remediation · Sources

A. K. Sanuj · N. Vanitha PG and Research Department of Microbiology, Hindustan College of Arts and Science, 28, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India P. F. Steffi (B) PG and Research Department of Microbiology, Cauvery College for Women (A), 18, Trichy, Tamil Nadu, India e-mail: [email protected] P. F. Mishel Department of Botany, Bharathidasan University, 24, Trichy, Tamil Nadu, India © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. P. Das et al. (eds.), Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution, Environmental Science and Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51792-1_1

1

2

A. K. Sanuj et al.

1.1 Introduction Microfibers (MFs) are a term used to describe a staple fiber or filament having a linear density of more than 0.3 dtex but less than 1 dtex. MFs are mostly produced from polyester and polyamide, however acrylic, viscose, and polypropylene are also available. Both pure microfiber fabrics and microfiber blends with viscose, cotton, or wool can be produced using them. MFs have a diameter that is 100 times smaller than human hair and half that of fine silk, one-third that of cotton, and a quarter that of fine wool. Fiber must be narrower than 1 dtex in order to be categorized as a microfiber. Microfiber fabrics typically have a soft drape on the body, don’t wrinkle easily, hold their shape, and don’t pill. In comparison to other textiles of the same weight, they are also reasonably sturdy and durable and have a higher degree of breathability and comfort when worn. Lower heat conductivity and higher thermal insulation qualities can be seen in microfiber-based fabrics (Markland et al. 2023). In the 1970s, Japanese fiber manufacturing businesses launched the first “microdenier” goods. Dr. Miyoshi Okamoto proved to be the primary architect of the microfiber revolution, and with the assistance of Dr. Toyohiko Hikota, Toray produced a variety of microfiber fabrics including Ultrasuede, which was one of the first microfibers to attain widespread popularity. US manufacturers began producing microfibers in the 1990s after Europe did it in the 1980s. With the notable exception of Ultrasuede, however, the usage of microfiber fabrics was extremely constrained until the 1990s, when Swedish textile producers started creating a wide range of additional microfiber materials. Almost suddenly, microfiber gained popularity as a fabric for clothing across Europe, and new uses for it in the cleaning and industrial sectors also emerged (Lee et al. 2023). Because of its unmatched softness, microfiber, which first gained popularity in cleaning goods, has become more popular in clothing and accessories. The many tiny filaments or fibers that are used in spinning have for greater drape and a very soft feel, add more motion, and let the fibers lightly shift in the spun yarns to avoid losing the yarn structure (Mishra et al. 2019). Knits made as a result don’t sag or droop. They appear to breathe as well as better absorb and wick moisture. Compared to conventional synthetic yarns, microfiber knits feel less damp and more like natural fibers when worn in warm weather. Because they are so small and the heat penetrates more quickly, microfibers should be used with caution as they are more heat sensitive than fibers of standard diameter (Ostheller et al. 2023). Because the microfiber fabric wicks moisture away from the body and keeps the wearer cool and dry, microfiber clothing has become a very popular alternative to cotton clothing for sportswear. Microfiber-based fabrics are incredibly soft and have good form retention. The right knitting technique combined with high-quality microfiber results in a highly efficient cleaning material. In addition to having a good level of durability, microfiber is also water-repellent and moderately absorbent. Products made of microfiber are also exceptionally good at absorbing oils. Microfiber shines as a filtering mechanism thanks to its excellent electrostatic properties, which

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

3

have recently sparked an increase in interest in employing this fabric for protective face masks (Kablov et al. 2023). Because of its distinctive structure, microfiber yarn functions as a capillary to eliminate debris that is too small to be seen by the naked eye. Surfaces are cleaned by wiping away dirt and soiling using a cloth. The microfiber eliminates the filth, whereas conventional round fibers smear it. In the beginning, microfiber towels were made to clean fine lenses. Today, more and more hard surfaces, such as glass, mirrors, ceramic tiles, basins, taps, stainless steel, melamine, and others, are cleaned to the same high standard using microfiber (Dong et al. 2023). Several different kinds of microfiber materials have been created throughout the years by textile manufacturers, and more and more novel uses for this fabric in various sectors are being discovered. Microfiber has a pronounced detrimental effect on the environment despite its amazing positive attributes. The type of microplastic (plastic particles with a diameter of less than 5 mm) that is most frequently discovered in the environment is microfiber. Plastic microfibers are present everywhere, even though we cannot see them (Buteler et al. 2023). Currently, environmental pollution is caused by the emission of various heavy metals and microplastics because of various industrial and mining activities (Das et al. 2011). Researchers have discovered microfibers in a variety of land and aquatic environments, including shorelines and the ocean floor. Microfibers can harm the small aquatic organisms that ingest them. Dr. Richard Kirby, a marine biologist, was able to photograph an arrow worm plankton encountering and digesting a single microfiber in 2017. The base of the marine food chain is comprised of plankton. All the plastics they eat are passed on. Several types of fish and shellfish that humans eat contain plastic microfibers in them, according to researchers. Even while scientific studies have shown that humans are exposed to microplastics through the food we eat, the water we drink, and the air we breathe, we are still unsure of the potential health implications of microplastics (Zhang et al. 2023). It is difficult to restrict the presence of these MF particles in all spheres of the planet, and the cross-infectivity has already impacted all habitats. Techniques with low infectivity are hazardous for an accurate estimation of their abundance in the environment. To manage and clean up synthetic fabric waste from the ocean and get rid of the main cause of marine microplastic contamination, a collaboration between nations is necessary. The employment of microorganisms in a natural setting should be a part of strategies for improved and efficient bioremediation of synthetic MFs. This article focuses on the production of microfibers worldwide, their sources, how they enter the ecosystem and food chain, whether they pose harm to people or aquatic life, current treatment options, and upcoming difficulties (Giambalvo et al. 2023).

4

A. K. Sanuj et al.

1.2 Manufacturing Process of Microfibers Microfibers can be produced using three common spinning techniques: melt spinning, dry spinning, and wet spinning. The polymerization procedure, polymer spinning, and drawing conditions, however, must be chosen and carried out with extreme care if microfibers are to be produced using these procedures. As microfibers are fragile materials that need careful handling during textile mill processing, the technology used to extrude them is more expensive and complex than that used to extrude regular deniers (Zhu et al. 2023). Generally speaking, there are two techniques to produce microfibers: • Conventional spinning • Conjugate spinning. For a number of reasons, traditional spinning techniques are difficult to produce: • The very thin fibers that emerge from the spinneret have very little mechanical stability. Process stability is restricted when it comes to melting spinning and solution spinning. • The productivity of the spinneret decreases with the linear density of the fibers for a fixed number of bores. Different procedures have been presented and employed to produce microfibers: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Direct spun type Dissolved type Split type Super drawing technique Sheath-core spinning method Flash-spinning method Solution flash-spinning Emulsion-spinning method Jet-spinning method Centrifugal-spinning method Turbulent forming method Conjugate-spinning method.

Direct Spun Type • Produced in melt spinning technique. • Careful selection of polymer and strictly maintained polymerization, spinning, and drawing is required. • The spin line tension level should be kept low. Parameters The increase is take-up velocity, and the fiber line length between the spinner and the take-up device is required to gain minimum fineness.

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

5

Dissolved Type • Produced from the bi-component fibers of different kinds of polymers • Thick bi-component filaments containing different incompatible polymers are spun. • Fabrics are made from the bi-component. • Chemical treatment with solvent dissolves one component, and the other remains as microfiber. Split Type • Bi-components are used, and splitting is done in filament form. • Suitable polymer combinations are polyester/polyamide and polyester/polyolefin. Super-drawing Technique • The main principle is yarn stretching. • Drawing carried out at minimum crystallizing temperature. • Special drawing technique (temperature range and type of heating the fiber) is maintained. • Stable fiber with 0.5dtex can be produced. • No molecular orientation is obtained. Sheath-core Spinning Method • One component (core) surrounded by another (sheath) component is produced by mixing, melting, and mix-annealing of two polymers under specific conditions. • The sheath portion is then removed. As a result of the technical difficulties to produce very fine diameters of synthetic fibers, alternative technologies were developed to produce such fibers on a technical scale. The preparation of microfibers using bi-component fibers (polyester/ polyamide) in addition to the hydrolytic removal of fiber polymer reduces the diameter of polyester fibers. Using this method, a bi-component fiber made of two incompatible polymers is created. The two fiber components are broken into small, lowdiameter microfibers by the action of heat, chemicals (such as alkali), and intense mechanical treatment (Babczynska et al. 2023).

1.3 Sources of Microfibers From a modest annual output of 1.7 million tonnes in the early 1950s to almost 1000 million tonnes, mass production of synthetic organic polymers, also known as plastics, has experienced remarkable growth (Yang et al. 2023b). Polyester, acrylic, polypropylene, polyethylene, and polyamide were the most prevalent synthetic fibers found in the environment. Sources are explained (Table 1.1).

6

A. K. Sanuj et al.

Table 1.1 Sources of synthetic microfibers that are present in the environment S. no. Sources

Several sorts of fabrics

1

Laundry services and the textile industry

Polyester

2

Rinsing and scrubbing of Non-cellulosic fibers such as nylon, polyamide, polyester, all synthetic apparel types non-cellulosic organic fibers, polyolefin, rayon, and acetate

3

Textile sector

Acrylic

4

Textile manufacturing

Polypropylene

5

Textile industry, and laundry

Polyethene

Microfibers have been discovered to be more common than other types of microparticles including fragments, films, pellets, spheres, or foams, and are pervasive in both aquatic and terrestrial settings. These particles are persistent in nature because synthetic textile fibers, unlike natural fibers, cannot decompose. Due to their ease of shedding from textiles and the exponential growth in the manufacturing of textile fibers worldwide, microfibers are quite common. When clothes are washed, dried, and worn normally, microfibers are liberated from them (Baraza and Hasenmueller 2023). According to a report from 2021, worldwide fiber output rose during the last two decades, rising from 58 million tonnes in 2000 to 109 million tonnes in 2020. It has been estimated that 0.19 million tonnes of microfibers from the production and everyday use of synthetic textiles, especially domestic clothing laundering, enter the marine environment each year (Fig. 1.1), and as consumption grows, that number appears set to increase even more. A major global issue, particularly in diverse water streams, is the growing amount of synthetic fabric waste in landfills and as litter that is visible on shorelines and coastal waterways (Mishra et al. 2020). The overall mass of fiber particles entering the oceans only makes up a tiny fraction, or about 6%, of the visible fabric. According to Boucher and Friot, the washing of clothing results in the release of around 34.8% of secondary microplastics into the ocean while the abrasion of tires results in the release of about 28.3% of microfiber particles (Liu et al. 2023). During production and home laundry, about 0.2 million tons of microfibers are released annually. These pollutants then make their way to the ocean, raising the alert level for aquatic life. A scientific study came to the conclusion that the type and quantity of microfiber discharge are greatly influenced by the properties of the clothing and that 1,500,000 particles, or around 300 mg, will be released for every kg of washed clothing (Gholizadeh et al. 2023). Microfibers are now pervasive in all ecosystems around the world, according to research that has expanded over the past ten years beyond coastal and marine habitats to sample freshwater lakes and rivers, terrestrial systems, atmospheric fallout, and terrestrial systems. Although studies on potential effects are growing, there is still a lack of understanding of the hazard to ecosystems and human health. In a different

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

7

Fig. 1.1 Sources of microfibers

experiment. To control the pollution and create a successful remediation strategy, it is essential to identify the sources and routes that the microfiber particles use to enter the environment (Mendoza et al. 2023).

1.4 Characteristics and Applications of Microfibers One of the best characteristics of microfiber is that it is highly absorbent and simple to clean, which makes it such a flexible and widely used fabric. In addition to being exceedingly breathable and great at wicking moisture away, microfiber has other characteristics that make it a popular choice for athletic wear and cloth diapering. One of the most affordable textiles produced, microfiber clothing is thin and breathable. The fact that microfiber may be treated to become waterproof and windproof is another advantage. Microfiber is a particularly sturdy fabric that keeps its shape nicely. Microfiber is strong and long-lasting, making it a great material for cleaning cloths that can be cleaned and used again without losing their quality (Tang et al. 2023). The chemical and physical features of the fabric’s component, the amount of fiber present, the physical and mechanical properties of the yarns that make up the fabric, and the finishing techniques used to create the fabric all have an impact on how it

8

A. K. Sanuj et al.

behaves. Blending the fibers in a fabric appears to be a potent way to change the characteristics and price of clothing. The most essential factor that affects important characteristics including strength, durability, handling, elasticity, dyeability, sheen, friction qualities, moisture absorbance, heat isolation, and abrasion resistance of fibers and their finished products is the type of fiber. The end-comfort products are most effectively determined by the fiber type (Maringolo et al. 2023). The spinneret’s shape and the way the fiber dough behaves as it exits the spinneret and hardens determine the cross-section of synthetic fibers. Profiled fibers, a very significant category of fibers, are produced using this process. Microfiber-based fabrics exhibit lesser heat conduction and, as a result, better thermal insulation qualities. Depending on the pressure, microfiber fibers feel warmer than normal fabrics, which may be a result of the different surfaces of the fiber (Hasenmueller et al. 2023). Microfibers can be distinguished from other materials by their exceptional qualities, including luster, pleasant softness and handling, good drapability, bulk, and exceptional surface features. They are hypoallergenic, non-electrostatic, washable, dry-cleanable, and shrink-resistant. Anti-microbial substances aid in shielding wearers from the hazards posed by bacteria that result in odor and mildew. Microfibers are much more absorbent than regular fibers, able to hold more than seven times their weight in water, and dry in a third of the time. In addition to being environmentally sustainable, they provide effective insulation against wind, rain, and cold (Ronda et al. 2023). Microfibers have a four times higher dyeing rate than regular fibers due to their larger absorption surface. As a result, they require more dye than ordinary fibers in order to get the same depth of shade. Their greater external surface means that there are more threads exposed to light, which results in a lower light fastness rating when the dye is destroyed. Desizing becomes exceedingly difficult and expensive because microfibers have very thin interstices, which makes it difficult for sizes to be accessible and diffusible (Genchi et al. 2023). Even while this miracle fabric has numerous advantages, there are also drawbacks to microfiber. To begin with, microfiber is prone to pilling and regularly produces static, which could result in an electric shock. The fact that microfiber fabric is a synthetic polyester that produces a lot of pollution and toxic waste is another drawback. Polyester and microfiber can also cause allergy responses in some people. Even though it is incredibly absorbent, you cannot use it alone to cover your baby’s skin while using cloth diapers; rather, you must combine it with a skin-safe fabric like cotton, hemp, or bamboo (Miranda et al. 2023).

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

9

1.4.1 Application of Microfibers 1.4.1.1

High-Performance Filter Fabrics

Microfiber fabrics, with their thin, compact structure, provide excellent filtration effects for both fluid and air filtration. A high electrical voltage combined with ultrafine microfiber goods, like 0.05 dtex PP microfiber nonwovens, can permanently polarize the nonwoven and attract and absorb charged dust particles without relying on more common microfibers (Maja et al. 2023). In the process of filtering solid or liquid materials, microfiber fabrics can offer superior filtration results. The following describes the attributes of microfiber liquid filters, rapid water passage speed, great extraction performance (retention of particles down to micrometer dimensions), and simplicity of micro-particle removal from the filter. Due to its small fiber diameter in comparison to the other fiber sizes already incorporated into the filter medium, the addition of a modest amount of splitable fiber should greatly boost the dust spot efficiency of filter materials (Detree et al. 2023).

1.4.1.2

Protection Against the Weather

Furthermore, woven athletic materials are used for insulation and wind and weather protection. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) was traditionally used to coat woven fabrics to protect them from the elements. Although the PVC coating ensures complete waterproofness, it has a significant drawback. It doesn’t allow for airflow, the user perspires after just a few minutes, and there is no way for him to expel body fluids to the outside of the garment. Almost all functional sportswear needs can now be met by MFs without the need for extra coating or membranes. Despite being able to breathe, they reject wind and water (Yang et al. 2023a).

1.4.1.3

Microfibers for Cleaning

Products made of microfiber can be used to clean anything. Microfibers actually “scrape” the filth or stain from the surface, unlike conventional cleaning materials that simply shift or push dirt and dust about. Products made of microfiber can be used to clean anything. Microfibers literally “scrape” the dirt or stain from the surface and then store the dirt particles in the fabric until it is washed, in contrast to regular cleaning materials that transport or push dirt and dust from one area to another. Microfiber cleaning cloths prevent dust and filth from spreading by trapping it inside the fabric. There is no need for chemicals when using water to clean the cloths (Cummins et al. 2023).

10

1.4.1.4

A. K. Sanuj et al.

Energy Conservation

Through the use of metal-coated microfibers, experiments have demonstrated significant energy savings in heat exchange processes. The microfiber’s capacity to transfer heat is evident in this situation. Enhancing heat transfer is possible by utilizing the metal-coated microfibers found inside heat exchanger tubes (Ma et al. 2023). The results of the aforementioned studies are as follows: • Pressure decreases rise with the number of microfibers; • Heat transfer increases with the amount of metal-coated microfibers. 1.4.1.5

Medical Applications

Microfibers’ biocompatibility offers considerable promise and a variety of uses in the medical industry (Fig. 1.2). Microfibers have demonstrated their viability in the usage of vascular prosthesis and are particularly compatible with human organs. Microfibers can assist and stimulate the living tissues to heal themselves.

Fig. 1.2 Medical applications of microfiber

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

11

1.5 Environmental Microfiber Pollution and Hazards Microfiber has a substantially detrimental effect on the environment, just like other polyester and synthetic fabrics. Petroleum, which is used to make microfiber, can pollute both air and water when improperly handled (Singh et al. 2020). Additionally, the production of microfiber results in the release of waste into the air, water, and land around it. According to a recent study, two million tonnes of microfiber are thrown into the ocean each year, making it one of the most serious pollutants. 13 million tonnes of synthetic materials are reportedly dumped into the oceans annually, according to the same study. About 2.5 million tonnes enter rivers and other smaller waterways each year. In addition to contributing to water contamination, microfiber also occupies space in landfills because it is not biodegradable like natural fabrics, making it impossible to predict when, if ever, it will decompose. Microfiber, then, plays a significant role in the continuous plastic waste issue facing the planet (Zambrano et al. 2023). Strategies for reducing microfiber pollution mostly concentrate on removing these particles at the source and then planning for affordable remediation technology. Future research will be needed to create methods for cleaning up these contaminants on-site by boosting natural attenuation with local microbes.

1.5.1 Terrestrial Microfiber Pollution Due to rising urbanization and industrialization, there is an increase in the amount of these microfibers discharged into the environment from various industrial and home effluents. In comparison to other pollutants, this is thought to be the most prevalent and persistent anthropogenic pollutant in the Earth’s atmosphere. The most important resource in the terrestrial ecosystem is the soil, which is heavily impacted by anthropogenic activity due to pollution. Terrestrial microplastic pollution may be caused by a combination of biological and human factors, including contaminated water, bio-fertilizers, suspended fibers in the air, and synthetic mulches used in agricultural fields. The addition of synthetic fibers to the environment is largely due to sewage. According to estimates, sewage contains between 80 and 90% of the fibers used to make clothing, with polyester and acrylic making up the majority (66 and 7%, respectively). Many thousands of tonnes of MFs get up in our soils each year as a result of this sewage sludge being used as fertilizer in agricultural fields (Priya et al. 2023). Then, for up to several years, these dangerous chemicals build up in soil without altering its physical characteristics. Additionally, MFs pollute the air through direct inhalation from landfills and through the dust of textile businesses, which use a lot of synthetic fibers. About 90% of these fibers suspended in the air are made of synthetic fiber, and they can be easily transferred from the source to an isolated location over great distances found that these artificial microfiber particles were present in zooplankton samples taken from the Admiralty Bay of Antarctica,

12

A. K. Sanuj et al.

Which when Consumed by fish to humans has a negative impact on several processes, including reproduction, energy reserves, and intestinal function in addition to other issues. Synthetic fibers have been indicated in the general human environment and enter the body through food, water, and air, raising concerns for human health. Humans are primarily exposed to these contaminants through the consumption of seafood, which is a vital dietary component and provides 20% of the world’s 4.3 billion people with animal protein. Synthetic microfibers have been found to bioaccumulate in the lungs and gastrointestinal system of humans, which can cause a number of negative side effects such as inflammation, genotoxicity, oxidative stress, and apoptosis in the body (Della et al. 2023). These also affect the immune system and cell health by moving from the circulatory system to the digestive system and accumulating in the secondary organs. Due to properties like hydrophobicity and size, which are close to areas where they could have a harmful effect, MFs are made to be more easily absorbed across the placenta and blood–brain barrier. Because of the high surface area to volume ratio of these fibers, they are highly chemically reactive. The chemical makeup of synthetic fibers, such as phthalates, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and bisphenol A (BPA), may have a number of harmful effects on human health, including damage to the intestines, liver, and kidneys; blood infections; breast cancer; and hormonal imbalance in the female reproductive system (Lopez et al. 2023).

1.5.2 Aquatic Microfiber Pollution Due to its capacity to adsorb other harmful pollutants when dispersed through the ecosystem, plastic pollution has been a source of ever-increasing marine environmental concern. Because of their special chemical characteristics, microfibers could theoretically survive in the water for hundreds to thousands of years. Due to their buoyancy and extraordinary durability, synthetic polymers are found in large quantities in rivers, lakes, and seas as well as accumulating in sediments all over the world. From the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, the confined ocean from the Caribbean Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, and even the abyssal and polar regions have all shown signs of microplastic accumulation. Population density and hydrology both affect microplastic pollution levels (Lopez et al. 2023). When microplastics lose their buoyancy, they eventually assemble in sediments. Aquatic animals are exposed to microfibers either directly or indirectly as they float on the water’s surface. According to several studies, this is a frequent method for the uptake by a range of aquatic animals (such as zooplankton, mussels, crabs, marine worms, and fish), which then gets accumulated in organs, this is regarded as primary exposure. Serious repercussions could result from microfibers blocking the flow of food components in the alimentary canal, including increased famine, impaired feeding capability and digestion, increased morbidity, and increased mortality. When larger plastic trash obstructs an aquatic animal’s digestive tract, it causes undernutrition and a medical condition.

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

13

Entanglement and ingestion, with entanglement being considerably more common, are implied by the physical impact on animals. Microplastic trash frequently causes aquatic animals to become encircled and tangled in plastic rings, fibers, or tires, which can result in drowning, suffocation, strangling, scoliosis of the spine bones, abrasions on the skin, and tissue damage. They also elicit immunological responses, induce genotoxicity, disrupt the endocrine system, cause induced neurotoxicity, cause reproductive abnormalities, and have transgenerational effects on marine organisms. Damage to cellular macromolecules, including DNA, carbohydrate, lipid, and protein structures, typically results from the excessive creation of reactive oxygen species (oxidative stress). These results imply that future toxicological studies should take the possible dangers of microplastic absorption by humans through the food web chain into account (Li et al. 2023b). Few aquatic plants, such as Lemna minor, Myriophyllum spicatum (e.g., earthworms), Chlorella pyrenoidosa, and Microcystis, have been studied. Researchers have discovered that MPs affect plant growth, inhibit photosynthesis, inhibit root growth, and shorten shoots. Almost less is known about how microplastics interact with aquatic invertebrates. Few studies have looked at how they affect invertebrates like amphipods, focusing primarily on mortality, growth inhibition, trophic transfer, bleaching and necrosis, and reproductive ability. Varied exposure intervals and exposure concentrations are associated with different cytotoxic effects of microplastics on invertebrates. According to Prinz and Korez, there are two methods that MFs enter cells: tiny fibers (less than 50 nm) can enter straight via the lipid membrane, while larger particles must enter through endocytosis or internalization through the lysosome. Given their mass manufacture and small size, these microplastics can easily enter cells via vesicles and interact with a wide range of biomolecules. According to zebrafish, copepods, and rotifers, toxicity often rises as particle size decreases (Ilechukwu et al. 2023). Due to their distinct hydrophobic properties, which influence the biological behavior of soil-dwelling organisms, the majority of plastic polymers harm the soil structure, including the bulk density and particle aggregations. Researchers have discovered that synthetic fibers prevent Collembolan from growing and reproducing, harm earthworms’ immune systems, cause avoidance behaviors, prevent springtails from reproducing, and alter the gut microbial community. Microfibers interact with bacteria and serve as a microbial habitat, causing intestinal mucus secretion to decrease, intestinal barrier function to become compromised, and generated gut microbiota dysbiosis (Santonicola et al. 2023).

1.5.3 Mechanism of Microfiber Toxicity The deposited MFs in internal cells are also transferred into other organs via the open circulatory system. The capacity of microplastics to accumulate inside tissues so influences cellular uptake and disposal. Additionally, due to cellular internalization,

14

A. K. Sanuj et al.

Fig. 1.3 The possible mechanism of MF toxicity

the buildup of these pollutants may harm the gastrointestinal system. The physiological activities of blue mussels, sea bass, and lugworms have all been observed to be significantly altered by these synthetic fibers (Li et al. 2023a). Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are produced once these MFs have entered the cell, which results in an oxidative stress environment. When inflammatory cells identify the fibers as foreign objects, ROS are created, which eventually leads to an oxidative stress situation. The enzymes in the cell control the amount of ROS, but chronic exposure to these fibers triggers a number of biological reactions, including inflammation and oxidative damage to cellular macromolecules like DNA, protein, lipids, and carbohydrates, which ultimately results in apoptosis and cell death proposed that exposure to microplastics causes living forms to produce ROS in the cell along with the regulatory genes linked with ROS (Fig. 1.3).

1.6 Detection and Characterization of Microfibers Since microfibers are so small that it is nearly impossible to remove them once they have entered an aquatic system, water pollution caused by these tiny particles is a growing problem that requires quick remediation strategies to eliminate MF pollutants. Synthetic MFs pollution remediation techniques should concentrate on the following: (1) Strict government laws; (2) Social awareness programs; and (3) Technology development for effective removal and remediation. We must find, identify, and quantify synthetic microfibers in order to learn more about their true effects

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

15

on the ecosystem. Reliable improved microscopic and spectroscopic approaches are needed for the detection and quantification of these emerging environmental pollutants. Chemical, thermal, and morphological methods could be used for the identification and description of microfibers. An essential method for identifying the family of textile fibers is the morphological examination of the microfiber. In fact, by examining microfibers under an optical or electronic microscope, it is feasible to detect the typical morphological characteristics of the fibers, which may then be used to determine their typical attributes (Zambrano et al. 2023).

1.6.1 Microscopic Analysis Microfibers are widely detected using a variety of microscopic techniques, including scanning electron microscopy (SEM), fluorescence microscopy, stereo microscopy, optical microscopy, bright-field microscopy, phase contrast microscopy, and X-ray. SEM is frequently used to produce clear, high-magnification images of plastic materials with high-resolution morphological analysis images that can be used to detect the size, age, and origin of microplastics. In addition, SEM can be used in conjunction with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) to reveal the chemical makeup of plastic components. In a recent scientific study on the detection of microplastics in nearby marine life by Ding, used SEM to characterize MPs with a variety of forms, including fragments, fibers, granules, and films that ranged in size from 57 to 8639 mm. Microplastic with a diameter of less than 1 mm was the most frequently found, accounting for nearly 70% of all microplastics found in a variety of marine creatures. Yin looked at the microplastic pollution in Changsha, China’s urban lakes’ topmost water. He used greatly enlarged SEM images to analyze the microplastics that had been collected, and he observed that the MPs came in a variety of morphologies, including films, fibers, pieces, and foams with surface scratches and fissures. Plastic particles in biological organic material can be found using fluorescence microscopy. This method offers a quick and affordable means of detection. In a recent scientific study published by Payton, synthetic fibers in a zooplankton sample were identified and measured using optical and fluorescence microscopy. The sample was obtained from tidal fronts in Charleston Harbor. The size of the collected fibers ranged from 43 to 104 mm. In a related study, the obtained sand samples were used to characterize microplastics in seashore sands of Indian coastal waters. According to reports, microplastics come in a variety of morphologies, including fibers, pieces, and films, which can be observed under a fluorescence microscope. These microplastics were primarily fiber-shaped and ranged in size from 5 to 36 mm. In a related scientific investigation, suspended microplastics were collected from atmospheric samples in the urban area of Hamburg, Germany, and characterized using high-resolution micrographs of fluorescence microscopy with the use of a digital camera. 95% of the entire amount of microplastic, he determined, was made up primarily of fragments (Priya et al. 2023).

16

A. K. Sanuj et al.

1.6.2 Spectroscopic Analysis Raman spectroscopy and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy are the most widely used spectroscopic techniques for the detection, characterization, and chemical identification of synthetic MFs. These two methods are vibrational spectroscopy methods that excite the sample’s molecules to produce spectrum peaks. The peaks in these spectra are then recognized by comparison with a library of spectra from conventional polymeric materials. The simplest method for more quickly identifying and determining the polymer content of MF particles is Raman spectroscopy. In this procedure, monochromatic wavelengths between 500 and 800 nm are applied to the sample, and the resulting spectra are compared to a library of known polymer spectra to determine the composition of the synthetic fiber. This technique is very much used for plastic litter samples from the marine environment. These fibers were less than 2 mm in diameter, and obtained with chemical compositions of polyethylene, polystyrene, polyethylene terephthalate, polyamide, and polyvinyl chlorides, with polypropylene being the most prevalent polymer. Microfiber pollution necessitates the creation of new methodologies and improvements to currently used ones (Grillo et al. 2023).

1.6.3 Using Multiple Lines of Evidence Identifying MFs often involves using Raman spectroscopy and the Fourier transform infrared. The use of dyes could affect the spectrum and make it difficult to determine the type of polymer. Also seen are band overlap or reduced polymer bands. Occasionally, dye signals rather than polymer signals are seen. Attenuated resonance FTIR (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy requires significant contact surface area for generating signals. As MFs are too small in length the signals may be weak, so posing difficulty to identify polymer type. Raman and micro FTIR requires fiber to be fixed to place throughout which is again a challenge. A multi-step approach for classifying microfibers according to material type was devised to assist overcome these problems. When chemical structural analysis equipment is not accessible, the proposed method, which combines four lines of evidence (relating to textile chemistry, density, and surface morphology), offers a practical and affordable means to identify microfibers. It also avoids the Raman dye interference problem. Finding colors frequently used with various materials kinds was the initial step. The second phase makes use of density tests, which offer an additional source of information on the type of material based on the densities of various textile materials. In the third step, surface morphology is used to provide information on the type of fiber material. The last phase employs a staining method particular to a given class of material and along with these steps, spectroscopic properties of microfibers were also used. Density separation and centrifugation are two more methods for removing MFs from waste water, however, these methods cannot be used to filter large volumes of

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

17

wastewater. According to recent findings, these fibers can be removed from tap water by employing granular activated carbon (GAC) tap filters, carbon block tap filters, and reverse osmosis filters. To measure and lessen this threat, it becomes necessary to develop filtering devices that can stop microplastic pollution in tap water. The applied prototype had a membrane with a porosity of 50 m, a diameter of 5 mm, and a concentration head with a diameter of 30 mm. Given that microfibers have two dimensions, a diameter, and a length, and that the membrane porosity permits water flow, a size pore of 50 m is a suitable compromise between water flow and pollution retention. Technologies including air flotation, sedimentation, and activated sludge are common in wastewater treatment plants. It could eradicate 91% of MPs larger than 25 mm when combined with nanotechnology. Researchers at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology have created a novel method called photo-catalysis that splits the polymers of petrochemical goods under artificial sunshine, but it is still in the early stages of study (Kavaliauskas et al. 2023). When using extracellular microbial enzymes for degradation, it is possible for microorganisms to utilize polymers as a substrate while starved and lacking in nutrition. The use of microbial enzymes for degradation is appropriate because no waste or hazardous byproducts have accumulated. It has also been demonstrated that extracellular enzymes are a crucial instrument in the depolymerization process of synthetic polymers.

1.7 Conclusion The occurrence of these MF particles in all spheres of the earth is not easy to control, and the cross-infectivity has already affected all the habitats. As the utility and applications for synthetic fibers grow, there will certainly be an increase in environmental accumulation and exposure to these materials. As these tiny fragments after their release into different water sources interact with plankton and sediments, both suspension and deposit feeders may unintentionally consume these tiny fragments. Methods providing minimum infectivity are dangerous for a suitable assessment of their quantity in the environment. Before entering the ocean water, precise procedures should have the objective of totally removing the main and secondary contributors of large objects and these little particles. Even though additional research is being done, this area of study can play a very important and major role in the public discussion on how to focus on these tiny microplastic particles without using standard waste management techniques. These concepts will require the implementation of educational curricula, the cooperation of urban and rural facilities, and influence using practical examples that clearly and unobtrusively illustrate good waste management. Remediation using microorganisms should be researched well and implemented. Plastic polymers and synthetic fabric fibers should be broken down by microorganisms into inorganic compounds. One of the microbes that have received the most attention for degrading polymers through the creation of biofilms is Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

18

A. K. Sanuj et al.

Mishandled plastic fiber waste is known to cause a number of environmental pressures, and as people’s awareness of these stresses has grown, efforts have been made by municipalities, businesses, the government, and the general public to reduce fiber waste. Microplastic textile fibers have received little environmental attention, despite the fact that the discharged waters of the textile industry are equally well-known as significant sources of chemical pollutants. Each step of the fabric life cycle involves the separation of synthetic textile MFs, particularly during the laundering process. The development of cost-effective and effective remediation technologies should be the main goal of strategies that organize microfiber pollution. Although multiple steps of treatment are necessary, wastewater treatment facilities should primarily employ novel approaches to address this pollution brought on by the sheds from synthetic garment products. Effective waste management programs must be improved, with a focus on recycling the trash to prevent the sinfiltration of microfibers into water bodies. It is important to conduct further research on this pollutant in order to create creative solutions. Future research is necessary to more fully comprehend the ecological implications of population increase and this microparticle pollution, as well as to find a practical and affordable method to reduce on-site contamination.

References Babczynska A et al (2023) Joint cadmium and polypropylene microparticle action in cadmium tolerant model insect: Environ. Toxicol Pharmacol 101:104209 Baraza T, Hasenmueller EA (2023) Floods enhance the abundance and diversity of anthropogenic microparticles (including microplastics and treated cellulose) transported through karst systems. Water Res 242: 120204 Buteler M, Villalobos E, Alma AM, Silva L, Tomba JP (2023) Management practice for small hive beetle as a source of microplastic contamination in honey and honeybee colonies. Environ Pollut 334:122151 Cummins AM, Malekpour AK, Smith AJ, Lonsdale S, Dean JR, Lant NJ (2023) Impact of vented and condenser tumble dryers on waterborne and airborne microfiber pollution. PLoS One 18(5): e0285548 Das AP, Sukla LB, Pradhan N, Nayak S (2011) Manganese biomining: a review. Biores Technol 102(16):7381–7387. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIORTECH.2011.05.018 Della TC, Riccardi N, Magni S, Modesto V, Fossati M, Binelli A (2023) First comparative assessment of contamination by plastics and non-synthetic particles in three bivalve species from an Italian sub-alpine lake. Environ Pollut 330:121752 Detree C, Labbe C, Paul-Pont I, Prado E, El RM, Thomas L, Delorme N, Le GN, Huvet A (2023) On the horns of a dilemma: Evaluation of synthetic and natural textile microfibre effects on the physiology of the pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas. Environ Pollut 331(Pt 2):121861 Dong J, Peng Y, Zhang Y, Chai Y, Long J, Zhang Y, Zhao Y, Huang Y, Liu T (2023) Superelastic radiative cooling metafabric for comfortable epidermal electrophysiological monitoring. Nanomicro Lett 15(1):181 Genchi L, Martin C, Laptenok SP, Baalkhuyur F, Duarte CM, Liberale C (2023) When microplastics are not plastic: chemical characterization of environmental microfibers using stimulated Raman microspectroscopy. Sci Total Environ 892:164671

1 Microfiber Sources, Characteristics, Environmental Impact …

19

Gholizadeh M, Shadi A, Abadi A, Nemati M, Senapathi V, Karthikeyan S (2023) Abundance and characteristics of microplastic in some commercial species from the Persian Gulf, Iran. J Environ Manage 344:118386 Giambalvo D, Amato G, Ingraffia R, Lo PA, Mirabile G, Ruisi P, Torta L, Frenda AS (2023) Nitrogen fertilization and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi do not mitigate the adverse effects of soil contamination with polypropylene microfibers on maize growth. Environ Pollut 334:122146 Grillo JF, Lopez-Ordaz A, Hernandez AJ, Catari E, Sabino MA, Ramos R (2023) Synthetic microfiber emissions from denim industrial washing processes: an overlooked microplastic source within the manufacturing process of blue jeans. Sci Total Environ 884:163815 Hasenmueller EA, Baraza T, Hernandez NF, Finegan CR (2023) Cave sediment sequesters anthropogenic microparticles (including microplastics and modified cellulose) in subsurface environments. Sci Total Environ 893:164690 Ilechukwu I, Das RR, Reimer JD (2023) Review of microplastics in museum specimens: an underutilized tool to better understand the Plasticene. Mar Pollut Bull 191:114922 Kablov VF, Novopoltseva OM, Kryukova DA, Keibal NA, Burmistrov V, Kochetkov VG (2023) Functionally active microheterogeneous systems for elastomer fire- and heat-protective materials. Molecules 28(13) Kavaliauskas Z, et al (2023) Recycling of wind turbine blades into microfiber using plasma technology. Materials (Basel) 16(8) Lee YH, Kim MS, Lee Y, Wang C, Yun SC, Lee JS (2023) Synergistic adverse effects of microfibers and freshwater acidification on host-microbiota interactions in the water flea Daphnia magna. J Hazard Mater 459:132026 Li J, Wang L, Xu Z, Zhang J, Li J, Lu X, Yan R, Tang Y (2023a) A new point to correlate the multi-dimensional assessment for the aging process of microfibers. Water Res 235: 119933 Li Y, Luo B, Liu Y, Wu S, Shi S, Chen H, Zhao M (2023b) Microfluidic immunosensor based on a graphene oxide functionalized double helix microfiber coupler for anti-Mullerian hormone detection. Biomed Opt Express 14(4):1364–1377 Liu YJ, et al (2023) Face mask derived micro(nano)plastics and organic compounds potentially induce threat to aquatic ecosystem security revealed by toxicogenomics-based assay. Water Res 242: 120251 Lopez ADF, De-la-Torre GE, Fernandez Severini MD, Prieto G, Brugnoni LI, Colombo CV, Dioses-Salinas DC, Rimondino GN, Spetter CV (2023) Chemical-analytical characterization and leaching of heavy metals associated with nanoparticles and microplastics from commercial face masks and the abundance of personal protective equipment (PPE) waste in three metropolitan cities of South America. Mar Pollut Bull 191:114997 Ma J, Chen F, Chen CC, Zhang Z, Zhong Z, Jiang H, Pu J, Li Y, Pan K (2023) Comparison between discarded facemask and common plastic waste on microbial colonization and physiochemical properties during aging in seawater. J Hazard Mater 455:131583 Maja V, Sanja V, Teresa RS, Jasmina A, Zoran C, Jelena R, Aleksandra T (2023) Improving of an easy, effective and low-cost method for isolation of microplastic fibers collected in drying machines filters. Sci Total Environ 892:164549 Maringolo V, Carvalho AZ, Rocha DL (2023) A novel online dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for the spectrophotometric determination of free glycerol in biodiesel. Anal Methods 15(24):2997–3004 Markland L, Johnson JS, Richert BT, Erasmus MA, Lay DC, Jr. (2023) Investigating the effects of jute nesting material and enriched piglet mats on sow welfare and piglet survival. Transl Anim Sci 7(1): txad076 Mendoza SM, Garcia-Moll MP, Fernandez VH, Barrios M, Mena R, Miriuka S, Cledon M (2023) Microplastics in stomach contents of juvenile Patagonian blennies (Eleginops maclovinus). Sci Total Environ 894:164684 Miranda CS, Silva AFG, Seabra CL, Reis S, Silva MMP, Pereira-Lima SMMA, Costa SPG, Homem NC, Felgueiras HP (2023) Sodium alginate/polycaprolactone co-axial wet-spun microfibers modified with N-carboxymethyl chitosan and the peptide AAPV for staphylococcus aureus

20

A. K. Sanuj et al.

and human neutrophil elastase inhibition in potential chronic wound scenarios. Biomater Adv 151:213488 Mishra S, Rath C, charan, & Das, A. P. (2019) Marine microfiber pollution: a review on present status and future challenges. Mar Pollut Bull 140:188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOL BUL.2019.01.039 Mishra S, Singh RP, Rath CC, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: source, transport and their remediation. J Water Process Eng 38:101612. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JWPE.2020.101612 Ostheller ME, Balakrishnan NK, Beukenberg K, Groten R, Seide G (2023) Pilot-scale melt electrospinning of polybutylene succinate fiber mats for a biobased and biodegradable face mask. Polymers (Basel) 15(13) Priya KK, Thilagam H, Muthukumar T, Gopalakrishnan S, Govarthanan M (2023) Impact of microfiber pollution on aquatic biota: A critical analysis of effects and preventive measures. Sci Total Environ 887:163984 Ronda AC, Blasina G, Renaud LC, Menendez MC, Tomba JP, Silva LI, Arias AH (2023) Effects of microplastic ingestion on feeding activity in a widespread fish on the southwestern Atlantic coast: Ramnogaster arcuata (Clupeidae). Sci Total Environ 892:164715 Santonicola S, Volgare M, Di PE, Mercogliano R, Cocca M, Raimo G, Colavita G (2023) Research and characterization of fibrous microplastics and natural microfibers in pelagic and benthic fish species of commercial interest: Ital. J Food Saf 12(1):11032 Singh RP, Mishra S, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: pollution toxicity and remediation. Chemosphere 257:127199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127199 Tang Z, Xu B, Man X, Liu H (2023) Bioinspired superhydrophobic fibrous materials. Small Methods e2300270 Yang Y, Li M, Yu H, Tong Y, Chen Q (2023a) Effects of fibrous microplastics on the accumulation of tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) isocyanurate and behavior of zebrafish via water- and foodborne exposure routes. Sci Total Environ 892:164389 Yang Y, Yang Y, Huang J, Li S, Meng Z, Cai W, Lai Y (2023b) Electrospun nanocomposite fibrous membranes for sustainable face mask based on triboelectric nanogenerator with high air filtration efficiency. Adv Fiber Mater 1–14 Zambrano MGG, Yoon SG, Lee JY, An J (2023) Effect of aging on polyethylene microfiber surface properties and its consequence on adsorption characteristics of 17alpha-ethynylestradiol. Sci Prog 106(2):368504231173835 Zhang S, et al (2023) Design of OMC-Sagnac loop using PDMS and different package structures to improve sensing performance and optimize the Ill-conditioned matrix. Sensors (Basel) 23(10) Zhu D, Wen A, Tang A (2023) Mechanical properties, durability and environmental assessment of low-carbon cementitious composite with natural fibrous wollastonite. Environ Res 234:116552

Chapter 2

Synthetic Microfibres: Sources, Fate, and Toxicity Chanchal Sharma, Gourav Sarkar, and Charu Dogra Rawat

Abstract Synthetic microfibers (SMFs) are a class of non-biodegradable polymers having a length of less than 5 mm and diameter of less than 10 µm. They consist of nylon, polyester, rayon, polyethylene terephthalate, polypropylene, acrylic, spandex and other synthetic materials, mostly manufactured from petroleum derivatives They can enter the environment from both primary sources: during the manufacturing of textiles, or secondary sources: due to usage of textiles and disintegration of larger plastic items. Like plastics in general, they display resistance to natural breakdown, and their minuscule dimensions make them challenging to identify and study, resulting in their prolonged existence in the environment. The water ecosystem is most affected by this microscopic threat, where they can be ingested by various marine life forms, affect their metabolism, movement, and digestion, and eventually deteriorate them to death. They also pose an underlying harm to humans since they can reach the tissues via diet. This chapter explores the origin of SMFs from various sources—air, sea, and land-based sources, their fate in the ecosystem, and their toxic effects on life forms. Keywords Synthetic microfiber · Non-biodegradable · Polymer · Pollutants

2.1 Introduction Environmental pollution is currently one of the most serious global issues which are equally concerning to scientists and the general public (Rai 2016). Environmental pollution can be defined as an unjust disposal of unwanted mass or energy into the earth’s natural resource pool which can have detrimental consequences (Yadav C. Sharma · C. D. Rawat (B) Molecular Biology and Genomics Research Lab, Department of Zoology, Ramjas College, University of Delhi, Delhi, India e-mail: [email protected] G. Sarkar Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. P. Das et al. (eds.), Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution, Environmental Science and Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51792-1_2

21

22

C. Sharma et al.

et al. 2022). These unwanted particles are called pollutants which can persist in the ecosystem for many years and degrade the quality and diversity of life forms in the location. And due to the dynamic nature of environmental elements, the pollutants are much more malignant than they are perceived. They are carried away from location to location through various currents and thus can contaminate locations even without direct human influence (Chiba et al. 2018). One such pollutant is plastic and its derivatives. Plastics were introduced in the 1950s to the public as a clean, durable, flexible yet strong material that was synthesized from crude petroleum waste. This material was soon ubiquitous in the environment. Plastic waste enters the natural environment and accumulates due to its high durability and low degradation rate by detritivores, making them a major cause of environmental pollution. According to the United Nations, every day an equivalent of 2,000 garbage trucks’ worth of plastic waste is dumped into the world’s oceans, rivers, and lakes where it persists for decades. Beyond these macroplastics, the more significant threat arises from microplastics (MPs), with microfibers (MFs) being a notable form among them (Carr 2017). Micro plastics are a group of miniscule plastic particles with a diameter of less than 5 mm. MPs can be released from the ones used in commercial products like selfcare items, paints and decorative items (primary MPs) and also from the continuous disintegration of textile fibers, tires and other macroplastics due to various physical and chemical aberrations (secondary MPs) (Boucher and Friot 2017a, b). A subclass of MPs is microfibers or MFs. Microfibers are of less than 5 mm in length and 10 µm in diameter, and share similar sources, fate and toxicity that of MPs. However the most common source of MFs is secondary, i.e. they are disintegrated from textiles and other fibrous materials. During production, usage, and end-of-life disposal, microfibers are released or shed into the environment from all types of fibrous materials, including clothing, agricultural, industrial, and home textiles, as well as some textile products, semi-manufactured goods, or accessories used in other areas (Liu et al. 2019; Zhou et al. 2020; Belzagui et al. 2019; Napper and Thompson 2016). They are also released due to the aberration of tires and road surfaces (Boucher and Friot 2017a, b; Kole et al. 2017; Panko et al. 2013; Baensch-Baltruschat et al. 2021). They are the most common type of microplastic detected in the natural environment (Geyer 2020; Carr 2017). Over 85% of the microplastic waste discovered on shorelines around the world is made up of microfibers (Carr 2017). SMFs are a class of non-biodegradable polymers with a diameter of less than 5 mm, including nylon, polyester (PE), rayon, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polypropylene (PP), acrylic and spandex (Geyer 2020). Regenerated cellulosic fibers such as rayon, bamboo fiber, diacetate fiber, and triacetate fiber are also said to be microfibers. SMFs arise from synthetic fibers which are a derivative of plastics. These fibers generate SMFs by fragmentation and disintegration of fibers (Napper and Thompson 2016; Zhou et al. 2020; Belzagui et al. 2019). During production, usage, and end-of-life disposal, microfibers are released or shed into the environment from all types of fibrous materials, including clothing, agricultural, industrial, and home textiles, as well as some textile products, semi-manufactured goods, or accessories used in other areas (Liu et al. 2019; Zhou et al. 2020; Belzagui et al.

2 Synthetic Microfibres: Sources, Fate, and Toxicity

23

2019). Apart from synthetic fabrics, natural materials like cotton and wool also liberate MFs in the environment (Onyedibe et al. 2023; Zambrano et al. 2019). According to some studies, microfibers in freshwater and atmosphere are dominated by natural microfibers, although the potential impacts of natural fibers on ecosystems and humans are thought to be negligible due to their biodegradability (Onyedibe et al. 2023; Zambrano et al. 2019; Stanton et al. 2019). However, SMFs can constitute up to 35% of primary microplastics in marine environments. Significant amounts of SMFs are to remain in the environment for the upcoming several decades sharing the same fate and toxicity as any other MF pollutant. Synthetic MFs enter the natural environment and continue to accumulate due to their low recycling rate and long durability, making them a major cause of environmental pollution. SMFs get carried away by oceanic currents to open waters, islands and frozen poles (Macieira et al. 2021; Adams et al. 2021; Absher et al. 2018). These particles can be picked up by various life forms in the marine environment, ranging from microscopic zooplankton to humongous whales which feed on microscopic food floating in ocean waters (Compa et al. 2018; Cole 2019; Santonicola et al. 2021; Macieira et al. 2021; Kahane-Rapport et al. 2022). They directly hamper the metabolism, movement, and digestion of these animals and deteriorate them till death. As plastics have been introduced into the environment comparatively recently in evolutionary timescale, indigenous soil biota have not yet developed biodegradative abilities. Due to high persistence and non-biodegradability, SMFs can retain themselves in the food chains and climb up to higher trophic levels through biomagnification. They have not only traveled to our plates, but rather have been detected in our tissues (Li et al. 2023). Various respiratory and cardiovascular problems are proven to be caused by inhalation of airborne SMFs from the environment (Pauly et al. 1998; Kwak et al. 2022). SMFs in soils have penetrated to deeper layers, degrading the quality of soils. Life forms’ life and diversity have been suffering due to this sudden change, and rigorous study and development of remediation techniques are very much needed.

2.2 Sources of Synthetic Microfibers Synthetic Microfibers (SMFs) are known to enter the environment from both primary sources (during manufacturing and use of textiles) and secondary sources (during disintegration of larger plastic items) (Fig. 2.1). Plastic microfibers (less than 5 mm) and nanofibers (less than 100 nm) have been discovered in ecosystems worldwide (Mishra et al. 2020). They are estimated to make up around 35% of primary microplastics in marine environments. And a substantial portion of microplastics persist for extended periods in coastlines, where the nearby soils are treated with waste treatment plant sludge (Henry et al. 2019). Coastal and marine areas are under constant and increasing threat from human activities. Pollutants including, but not limited to, synthetic microfibers greatly impact the marine ecosystem. These small plastic fibers enter the marine environment via several activities on land or in the marine environment itself. Microplastic

24

C. Sharma et al.

Fig. 2.1 Illustration showing various sources of SMFs into the environment, carried by different medium

beads present in toothpaste and scrubs get into the marine ecosystem via domestic and industrial drainage systems (Auta et al. 2017). Wastewater treatment plants are known to proficiently discard microplastics from sewage water and concentrate them in the sludge to prevent their entrance in aquatic environments. However, using the sludge as a biofertilizer on soil has become a common agricultural practice leading to microplastic contamination of the soil (Davis and Hall 1997; Corradini et al. 2019). Recent studies have also described the presence of microfibers in indoor as well as outdoor atmosphere, although there is little information regarding the concentrations of these airborne microplastics (De Falco et al. 2020; Dris et al. 2017). Wear and tear of clothing and industrial chopping or grinding of synthetic material can be the main cause of entry of these fine particles in the air (Prata 2018; Gasperi et al. 2018). The following sections are going to discuss in detail, the role of water, land and air as mediums for assisting the passage of SMFs into the environment.

2.2.1 Water MFs are found in very high concentrations in ubiquitous water ecosystems, both marine and freshwater. Shores are found to be highly contaminated with microplastics

2 Synthetic Microfibres: Sources, Fate, and Toxicity

25

out of which more than 85% is formed by MFs. These microfibers endure within oceanic waters, perpetuating the pollution and harm to marine life. MFs can be discharged into water through sources originating from water-based activities or land-based activities (Liu et al. 2019). Water based sources include fragments by breakdown of materials within the water, such as ropes and plastic containers, as well as the shedding of deteriorating paint from coastal structures or ships (Barnes et al. 2009; Rees et al. 2014). However, the primary pathways for microfiber entry into aquatic ecosystems from land-based sources are through household and industrial wastewater (Hartline et al. 2016; Murphy et al. 2016). These sources dispose of MFs in rivers which then become the centralized systems in delivering the pollutants to larger water bodies (Besseling et al. 2017; Miller et al. 2017). Ultimately, the oceans and marine life bear the consequences.

2.2.1.1

Industrial Wastewater

Textile sectors have held a significant position in the market throughout history. However, the advent of synthetic and semi-synthetic fibers has attracted a substantial share of the market away from traditional textiles. Synthetic textiles, constructed with synthetic fiber, are experiencing increased demand owing to their impressive capability to imitate natural fibers, as well as their noteworthy durability and cost-effectiveness. Currently, around 14% of global plastic production is dedicated towards synthetic fibers and textiles (Geyer et al. 2020). Despite its high durability, synthetic fabric still emits microfibers like natural textiles, if not more (Zambrano et al. 2019). The mechanical forces acting on fibers and fabrics release synthetic fibers of various sizes into wastewater. In some nations, industries are obligated to treat wastewater and eliminate these fibers prior to discharging the effluent. But even after rigorous treatment, achieving a complete 100% removal of MFs is not possible (Xu et al. 2018; Zhou et al. 2020). Even after the removal of 95% of MFs, wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) can still release 489 million MFs per day in an aquatic system (Xu et al. 2018). In certain WWTPs, the count of MFs released can be substantial, reaching as high as 360,000 million per day due to the large volume of effluent. Zhou et al. discovered that rayon microfiber concentrations from a textile printing mill could reach 54,100 MFs per liter, but after undergoing treatment in WWTPs, this concentration decreased to 1,333 MFs per liter of wastewater effluent (Zhou et al. 2020). Mills that adopted RO before releasing wastewater into the environment, released 700 times fewer MFs but were still as high as 1800 MFs per liter of wastewater (Zhou et al. 2020). Likewise, differences in this value can emerge due to variations in mill and textile types, wastewater treatment procedures, and measurement techniques. Specific details regarding tested mills, their associated wastewater treatment plants, and effluent characteristics are presented in Table 2.1. Nevertheless, these statistics pertain to a limited number of existing industries with both integrated and isolated wastewater treatment plants. Approximately 80% of industrial wastewater is discharged into aquatic systems without appropriate management, let alone treatment. The quantity of microfibers entering the environment

26

C. Sharma et al.

Table 2.1 Amount of MFs released from various industries and waste water treatment plants Sources

Type of fibers

Size

Concentration MFs released References

Washer Only accounts green > red. The analysis provided us with new insights into the human activities and natural processes of these marine environments. To solve the plastic accumulation problem, recycling, and production of bioplastic, by introducing laws to control the sources and the use of plastic additives.

S. Moharana · S. Dey · S. Priyadarsini · M. S. Kumar · A. P. Das (B) Department of Life Sciences, Rama Devi Women’s University, Vidya Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India e-mail: [email protected] Department of Biosciences and Bioengineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Bombay, India © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. P. Das et al. (eds.), Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution, Environmental Science and Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51792-1_4

57

58

S. Moharana et al.

Keywords Microplastics · Abundance · Distribution · Marine sediment · Synthetic polymers

4.1 Introduction Plastics have become an essential material in our modern way of living since the 1950s, resulting in a global demand of USD 457.73 billion in 2022 and an expected USD 643.37 billion by 2029, exhibiting a CAGR of 5.0% during the forecast period. Plastic particles less than 5 mm in length (or about the size of a sesame seed) are generally referred to as microplastics (MPs), and research on MP pollution began more than 50 years ago. Anthropogenic and geogenic processes like the weathering process play a vital role in the accumulation of plastic waste in the aquatic environment. Pollution through mining sites (Das et al. 2011; Paul et al. 2023; Pradhan et al. 2023), domestic sewage, industrial disposal, landfills, fishing activities, and maritime transport are some of the activities that help in the transportation of microplastics into the environment (Das and Ghosh 2022; Das and Mishra 2009; Mishra and Das 2021). Microplastics are distributed abundantly and widely by wave action, and wind along the seashore, coastal locations, and seawater depths. It has been estimated that more than 10 million tons of plastic end up in the ocean every year and plastic make up 80% of all marine debris found from surface waters to deep-sea sediments, which will probably remain for several hundred years (Singh et al. 2020). Some reports indicate that >300 million tons of plastics are produced every year for a wide variety of applications but recycling management is poor as compared to production. Recent reports have shown that microfibers are one of the prevailing types of MPs found in surface waters due to their low density and tend to float on surface water as “plastic islands” along with water currents that help far transport from their sources of origin. The sources of microfibers are ropes, clothes, fishing nets, plastic tarps, and more. These particle classifications depend upon the origin and production process as synthetic, natural, and semi-synthetic. Microplastics can be distinguished as primary which are produced from the synthetic textiles industry during manufacturing (Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c; Mishra and Das 2022). Secondary MPs are generated by fragmentation of macroplastics due to the action of physical, biological, and chemical factors. They can also be categorized as biodegradable or non-biodegradable depending on the extent of plastic degradation which depends upon factors like chemical properties, polymer type, and environmental conditions (Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c). The direct impact of microplastics on marine organisms may be physical and chemical whereas, physical effects are mostly related to the size and shape, and the chemical effects are related to that plastic carries a “cocktail of chemicals”. Widely distributed microplastics with fast-increasing records reported that chemicals present in foods, air, and drinking water potentially pose a direct hazard to human health as well as to marine organisms (Dey et al. 2023; Mishra et al. 2019; Raj and Das 2023). Worldwide plastic generated annually per person varies, only 9% of plastic waste is recycled successfully according to the report, nearly 12%

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

59

is burned and the rest ends up in landfills or in the environment, especially in poor countries waste management systems are not well developed. In 2020 plastic use decreased to approximately 3% due to the COVID-19 pandemic but a rise in medical equipment like masks and food takeaway packaging has driven up littering. Plastics are a good market product and become very popular and alluring materials as they are lightweight, cheap, durable, and corrosion-resistant in nature. Among the most demanded plastics LDPE (Low-density polyethylene) and PET (Polythelene terephthalate) are common in their use. A recent report of 2020 mentioned the percentage of LDPE is 17.4% and PET percentage is 8.4% in the countries of the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom (Plastic Europe 2021). The COVID-19 pandemic situation in 2020 has dropped plastic use globally but an estimated report clarified the amount of face masks is 1.56 million entering the ocean body, alarming very urgent to implement policies to reduce pollution to find cheap and eco-friendly solutions. Synthetic polymers such as PA, PE, PP, PES, and PS are used for the manufacturing of plastic and were the only source of increase in the pollution rate even found in cosmetic and medical products. Different polymer type analysis of microplastics in marine by FTIR, Raman spectroscopy, and Scanning Electron Microscopy control measures to minimize plastic consumption and risks to the marine ecosystem. The abundance of nanoplastic is not only limited to marine but also agricultural fields. Physical property small in size easily enters the aquatic food chain from the phytoplankton level and is transported to the higher trophic level through the food chain (Ghosh et al. 2018). The recent research is based on the production of bio-degradable plastics i.e., bioplastics that can be converted into water and CO2 by the action of microorganisms under aerobic conditions. A large number of studies indicate the presence of plastic as a pollutant in the Paradeep Sea beach, MPs have been found in biotic and abiotic areas including beach sand and sediments, due to its oceanographic conditions and the high degree of different anthropogenic pressures present in that area as well as maritime transport and fishing activities. Water and food pollution with various chemicals such as dyes (Bhattacharjee et al. 2021; Das and Swain 2013; Ahmad et al. 2020) and metals such as nickel, copper, gold, lead, arsenic, cadmium, zinc, chromium, and mercury released from different industries have been widely recorded (Mishra et al. 2023a, b). Human activities such as metal smelting, mining, and manufacturing as well as the disposal of agricultural and industrial effluents, produce metals that can be detrimental to human health if consumed in large enough quantities (Lahiri et al. 2021; Mishra and Das 2008, 2021; Prabhakar et al. 2019; Almajed et al. 2022). As a result of the biological debris recycling process, other species can use and reuse bioremediation as another type of waste management (Das et al. 2015; Ghosh and Das 2017; Mishra et al. 2023a, b; Sahoo et al. 2022). A reliable environmental monitoring system is critical for the rapid detection of environmental microfibre contaminants and the long-term management of the environment and human health (Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c; Tripathy et al. 2022). Plastic waste degradation in the environment is thought to be a primary mechanism leading to the creation of plastic particles (Mishra et al. 2009; Mishra et al. 2021a, b). Although research on the environmental degradation of plastics and the

60

S. Moharana et al.

creation of microplastics is still limited, and therefore, a greater understanding of their destiny and impacts is required (Mishra and Das 2023). In this chapter, we will examine the current methods for determining the quantity of microplastics in the marine environment. We will concentrate on the most practical methodologies and procedures for identifying microplastics. Following a review of non-selective sampling methodologies and sample processing in the laboratory, we will expose the reader to currently used microplastic detection techniques.

4.2 Materials and Methods 4.2.1 Sampling Location The Paradeep Sea beach is located on the shore of the Bay of Bengal on the Eastern coast of Odisha. The region expands the total area of 105 km2 (41 sq mi) with geographical coordinates 20.3160N, 86.6100E. This region was chosen for sampling of marine microplastic because one of the most important commercial ports, Fishing activity is completely developed and largest on India’s east coast. A top tourist place of attraction in Odisha. The geographical map and sampling site of the Paradeep beach are shown in Fig. 4.1. It is the only major port in Odisha situated 210 nautical miles south of Kolkata and 260 nautical miles north of Visakhapatnam. The marine microplastics were sampled from dry sandy of sea beach areas including 25 locations on the coast of the Bay of Bengal.

4.2.2 Sample Collection Sample collection was done within 3 months from 4th December 2022, on Sunday to 19th February 2023. There are 40 samples collected throughout sampling in the region sea beach side of Paradeep and Sahadabedi from both the surface area and deep layer (2–10 cm) of the sand, the total area is 20 km covered. The sample was collected in a square of 26 cm × 26 cm quadrant by maintaining a distance of 500 m between two sampling points. During the sampling period, wearing cotton cloth with proper sanitation, dry sands, and sediments are collected by hands by covered with gloves. The weight of each sample was 500 gm and was taken into an aluminum box, then numbered like (1,2,3) by a marker, kept at 40 C temperature, and brought into the laboratory for further analysis. The coordinates, depth surface, substrate, structure of samples, and date of sampling were recorded into a table for further study and photos were captured of sampling sites and the sea beach area. The different location sites of Paradeep Coast are demonstrated in Fig. 4.2. The details about the coordinates and sampling sites are provided in (Table 4.1). The abundance of collected samples is different in size, colours, and different types of polymers.

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

61

(a)

(b) Fig. 4.1 Represents the geographical map (a) and sampling site (b) of Paradeep Coast

4.2.3 Sample Preparation All the collected samples were brought into the laboratory. Before doing the sample preparation in the laboratory, hands are covered with gloves and laboratory coats as

62

S. Moharana et al.

a.

c.

b.

d.

Fig. 4.2 Different location sites of Paradeep Coast

a precaution method for every work. The steps followed in the laboratory include separation and purification by density-wise process and separation by sieving.

4.2.4 Sample Separation and Purification Filtering or sieving is the most commonly used for separating the supernatant containing microplastics from sediments and sand samples. The sieving process was performed to separate the microplastics according to their size. 200 gm of sample was taken into a steel siever then by sieving process supernatant was separated from the rest. The same process was repeated for all the collected 40 samples of Paradeep Sea Beach.

4.2.5 Density Separation and Plastic Extraction Microplastics tend to float on the water surface due to low density. In density separation, MPs were collected through a series of processes such as stirring, mixing, standing, and settling by the addition of a flotation solution. The solution of NaCl was used extensively for the separation of microplastics because of nontoxic, cheap, and readily available. The density separation step was followed by the addition of 30% H2 O2 . The collected sample of approximately 25 g of oven-dry sediment from each size fraction was dipped in a beaker with 40–68 mL of salt solution, then stirred by a rod and left to settle. After completely settling at the bottom position of the beaker microplastics were collected that were floated on the surface. The supernatant was

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

63

Table 4.1 The detailed information about the location, coordinates, depth of surface, no. of sample, sample types, substrate, structure, and size of microplastics throughout the sampling procedure Sl Location no

Coordinate Depth of surface

No. of Sample type sample

Substrate Structure Size in (C/M) cm

1

Paradeep beach

20.251929 86.657243

On surface

1

Thread

Sand

Green

0.8

2

Paradeep beach

20.290404 86.707218

On surface

2

Thread

Sand

Green

0.1,1.0

3

Paradeep beach

20.251998 86.657393

2.0 cm

3

Fiber

Sand

Yellow

0.5,1.5

4

Paradeep beach

20.288608 86.703809

On surface

2

Fiber

Sand

Yellow

0.5,0.7

5

Paradeep beach

20.252057 86.6574

2.0 cm

6

Fiber

Sand

White, Yellow

0.1,1.5

6

Paradeep beach

20.290414 86.707219

On surface

5

Fiber

Sand

Blue, Orange

0.5, 0.7

7

Paradeep beach

20.289922 86.70718

4.0 cm

4

Thread

Sediment Green, Orange

1.5, 2.5

8

Paradeep beach

20.252064 86.657434

4.5 cm

3

Fiber

Sediment Blue

0.1, 0.7

9

Paradeep beach

20.252027 86.657363

10.0 cm 3

Thread

Sand

Blue, White

0.2,1.0

10 Paradeep beach

20.287301 86.703974

On surface

3

Polyethylene Sand

White

0.3,0.5

11 Paradeep beach

20.28726 86.703991

2.6 cm

1

Polyethylene Sand

White

2.5

12 Paradeep beach

20.288643 86.703832

6.0 cm

2

Fiber

Sand

Blue, Red

2.5,2.7

13 Paradeep beach

20.251308 86.657558

6.6 cm

6

Fiber

Sand

Blue

0.3,0.9

14 Paradeep beach

20.1916 86.657996

On surface

4

Fiber

Sediment White, Red

0.5,2.0

15 Paradeep beach

20.251908 86.657261

8.0 cm

3

Fiber

Sediment White

2.5,2.7

16 Paradeep beach

20.253287 86.656798

8.4 cm

4

Polyethylene Sediment White

0.2, 0.9

17 Paradep beach

20.254951 86.657402

6.2 cm

6

Fiber

Sand

White

0.9,1.5

18 Paradeep beach

20.251641 86.658284

On surface

1

Fiber

Sand

Blue

1.9

19 Sahadabedi 20.088707 86.465719

On surface

3

Polyethylene Sand

Blue

1.1,1.5

20 Sahadabedi 20.088743 86.465731

On surface

1

Polyethylene Sand

White

0.2 (continued)

64

S. Moharana et al.

Table 4.1 (continued) Sl Location no

Coordinate Depth of surface

No. of Sample type sample

Substrate Structure Size in (C/M) cm

21 Sahadabedi 20.088705 86.465724

10.0 cm 2

Polyethylene Sand

22 Sahadabedi 20.088503 86.465728

8.1 cm

1

Fiber

Sediment White

0.5

23 Sahadabedi 20.087706 86.465621

2.5 cm

1

Fiber

Sediment Yellow

1.2

24 Sahadabedi 20.07874 86.435721

5.0 cm

1

Polyethylene Sand

White

0.7

25 Sahadabedi 20.08873 86.465725

10.0 cm 2

Fiber

Blue

0.3,0.9

Sand

White

0.1,0.3

filtered by an 11 µm cellulose filter membrane, transferred to a Petri dish, and airdried at room temperature. The second density separation step was performed using ZnCl2 solution to separate higher-density plastics like PET and PVC.

4.2.6 Identification and Characterization of Plastic and Microplastic Visual identification is a suitable method for plastic particles with large sizes, more than 1 mm. The concentration of MPs ranged from 5 to 7, obtained per 200 gm of the sample (7 ± 200 particles.gm−1 ) and the total collected microplastics were 100 from all the collected 40 samples. The microplastic concentrations found near the seashore are comparatively higher than the distance of the seashore of Paradeep Sea Beach. Different types of polymers were also identified by visual identification like polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) from the sample type such as polyethylene, fiber, thread, and rope. There was various range of colors found in the decreasing order of abundance as Blue > White > Orange > Yellow > Green > Red that indicated 37% of samples were Blue, 21% of samples were white, 17% were orange, 10% were yellow, 8% were green, 7% were red having size range varies between 0.1 to 2.7 cm. Of all colors blue color was the maximum and the sample type was fiber.

4.2.7 Microscopic Analysis Digital microscopy or virtual encompasses the digitization of optically scanned slides and viewing of these scans via specialized computer software at a resolution similar

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

65

to conventional microscopy. The maximum magnification of a digital microscope is 2000X. Microplastic was placed on the slide by using a tweezer and then gently a coverslip was placed over the specimen. Then the slide was viewed under the microscope and a scanned photo of the microplastic was taken. MPs with various shapes and sizes e.g., irregular, hexagons, and spheres were determined by microscopy analysis.

4.3 Results and Discussion 4.3.1 Sampling Sites and Location Sediment and sand samples were collected from the 2 sampling sites which are zone. (i) Different areas of Paradeep Sea Beach and Zone, (ii) Sahadabedi which is situated in the Jagatsinghpur district, Odisha on the Eastern coast side, India has a longitude and latitude of 86.610°E and 20.316°N. This region was chosen for sampling due to one of the most important Commercial ports on the east coast and its location at the confluence of the river Mahanadi with the Bay of Bengal. The port developed into a world-class modern port having the capacity to handle Capesize vessels and any cargo. It can handle all kinds of import and export goods including Chrome ore, Iron ore, Coal, Limestone, Aluminium ingot, Fertiliser raw materials (FRM), Container cargo, Dolomite, Gypsum, and Petroleum. Paradeep has become a hub of industrial activities like IFFCO, PPL, CARGILL, IOCL, BPCL, HPCL, Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd., and Essar Steel’s pellet plant. A quantity of 575.52 lakh tonnes of cargo was unloaded and 569.97 lakh tonnes of cargo was loaded during the year 2020–2021. Paradeep is emerging as a major industrial hub with several upcoming steel plants including a US $12 billion plant being developed by POSCO of South Korea. Facilitate maritime transport, and fishing activities, boost the industrial economy, and create jobs. Using GPS location, the details about the coordinates of sampling sites, soil depth, and date of collection were recorded.

4.3.2 Sample Collection For characterization of MPs, 40 samples were collected from 25 locations of sand and sediment type covering an area of 20 km from 4th December 2022, on Sunday to 19th February 2023. Samples were collected in a square of 26 cm × 26 cm quadrant by maintaining a distance of 100 m between two sampling points. Each sample was 500 gm and poured into an aluminum box, numbering like (1,2, 3…), and immediately transported to the laboratory for further analysis.

66

S. Moharana et al. a.

b.

c

d.

Fig. 4.3 Represents the density separation method for the extraction of microplastic sample

4.3.3 Sample Separation and Purification The microplastics were divided into different sizes using the sieving technique. A steel sieve containing 200 gm of sample was used to separate the supernatant from the remaining material. All 40 samples of the Paradeep Sea beach that were taken underwent the same procedure. For the separation of the microplastics, a NaCl solution was utilized. 30% H2 O2 was also added. A beaker filled with a flotation solution was used to dip the collected sample into, and a rod was then used to agitate it. Microplastics were gathered after completely settling at the beaker’s bottom position and floating on the surface. The Density Separation Method for the extraction of microplastic samples is represented in Fig. 4.3. The supernatant was transferred to a Petri dish, filtered using a filter membrane, and then allowed to air dry at room temperature. Higher-density plastics like PET and PVC were separated in a second density separation stage using a ZnCl2 solution followed by the same procedure of first density separation. After the density separation, the microplastics are extracted and dried for further process. The extracted microplastics are demonstrated in Fig. 4.4.

4.3.4 Characterization of MPs in the Marine Soil First soil samples were subjected to a density gradient for separation of MPs according to density and to determine various attributes that accumulated in the soil environment. The distribution graph shows different colors, diameters of samples,

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

67

Fig. 4.4 Represents the extracted microplastics after the process

and colors such as white, yellow, blue, and green. The abundance of blue colour more than other colours (37%), the least one is red colour (7%). The color distribution graph of microplastic has been demonstrated in Fig. 4.5. Among of them the highest number of collected sample types were fiber which consists of 30 in number and the lowest number of collected sample types were thread which is 10 in number. The highest number of samples were collected from the surface, 10 samples from the depth ranges between 2.0–4.0 cm, 6 samples obtained from the depth ranges between 4.0–6.0 cm, the deeper layer of sediment ranges between 6.0–8.0 cm and 8.0–10.0 cm ranges 12 in number and 4 in number respectively. The abundance of polymers type maximum obtained from the depth ranges between 4.0–6.0 cm and the lowest obtained from the depth 8.0–10.0 cm. Of all the types of polymers, PET was the maximum in number present on surface area and its lowest concentration was found from the depth 8.0–10.0 cm. The abundance of polymers at different depths of sand is depicted in Fig. 4.6.

4.3.5 Microscopic Analysis Microplastics were placed on slides by using metal tweezers and then gently covered by coverslips. Then the slides were viewed under the microscope and scanned photos of microplastics were taken. Microplastics with various shapes and sizes e.g., irregular, spheres, and hexagons were determined by microscopic analysis. Figure 4.7

68

S. Moharana et al.

Fig. 4.5 Color Distribution of collected microplastic samples

Colour Distribution of Microplastics 4%

9%

4%

20%

24%

39% Green

Yellow

White

Blue

orange

35 30

Number of Sample

25 20 15 10 5 0

Depth of Sample surface

2.0-4.0

4.0-6.0

6.0-8.0

8.0-10.0

10.0-12.0

Fig. 4.6 Graph showing the abundance of polymers at different depths of sand

red

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

69

Fig. 4.7 Microscopy analysis of microplastics shows the magnified images of fishing net, fiber and polyethylene having different shapes and sizes

shows the magnified images of fishing net fiber, polyethylene, and thread having different shapes and sizes.

4.3.6 Plastic Waste Management Solutions are necessary for the ecologically responsible management of plastic rubbish, which may help in the proper use of plastic material. Plastic trash mismanagement may offer environmental difficulties, such as ruining the aesthetics of the city and blocking drains if littered, generating air pollution when burnt, and interfering with waste manufacturing facilities when rubbish is combined with plastic materials (Das et al. 2023). The most prevalent conventional ways for handling plastic debris are recycling, landfilling, and incineration. Recycling is a key component of modern waste reduction. By reducing raw material intake and diverting waste output in

70

S. Moharana et al.

the economic system, it enhances environmental sustainability. Recycling decreases harmful substances throughout an environment, uses less energy, and contributes to natural conservation. It conserves landfill space and reduces the requirement for fossil fuel usage. Some chemicals are discharged into the environment during the recycling process which include the volatile gases derived from plastic waste compositions and organic chains of monomers that form a plastic chain of organic fumes and ashes (Mishra et al. 2020). This waste can damage plant structures and have an impact on wildlife when ingested by various animals living near the recycling zone. Plastics discarded after use in various dustbins end up in landfills. Landfills are all sites and regions where we reject all disposable plastic garbage after use before burying it under the earth’s surface. Many preventive steps should be taken throughout this manual disposal procedure to minimize secondary adverse effects such as groundwater pollutants and soil degradation that might occur from improper processing (Mishra, Rout et al. 2021a, b). The goals of the landfill arrangement are to create a safer region for plastic waste disposal in order to safeguard all aspects of the environment, including aquatics and airspace, in order to meet the goals stated above. It necessitates a significant amount of communal effort, such as excavating a deep hole or dropping garbage into it and allowing it to degrade (Mohanty et al., 2024, Mallick et al., 2023, Das et al., 2023). Therefore, the first selection or choice for disposing of all plastic products must be reused or recycled. Furthermore, this is a low-cost approach to managing plastic garbage. In a number of areas, waste incineration falls short of being an effective solution to the plastics challenge. For instance, waste incineration encourages and is dependent on the continuing generation of waste, particularly plastic waste. In addition to being an environmental and health risk, incineration frequently fails to provide its core functions of trash disposal and energy generation in a cost-effective manner.

4.4 Conclusion The present investigation reports the characterization and identification of microplastics from the sand and sediments of Paradeep Sea Beach, Odisha. This site was taken for study due to one of the most important commercial ports on the east coast at the confluence of the river Mahanadi with the Bay of Bengal. Paradeep became a hub of industrial activities, handling all kinds of import and export goods. It can be concluded from the present study that different types of microplastics in the beach sand and sediments are due to anthropogenic activities, maritime transport, and fishing activities. This investigation contributes to a detailed understanding of the microplastic analysis of Paradeep Sea Beach. Sample collections were done within 3 months from 4th December 2022 to 19th February 2023. The identification of microplastics was examined on a lab scale by density gradient separation and microscopic analysis. The maximum obtained of blue color fibers from the samples indicated that fishing activities pollute the marine water body. Small-sized polymers were subjected to the weathering and degradation process. The highest abundance of MPs was found in

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

71

the vicinity of highly populated areas. This research analysis provided new insights into the human activities and natural processes of these marine environments. To solve the microplastic accumulation and pollution problem of Paradeep Sea Beach by introducing laws to control the sources, use of bioplastics, and future research.

References Ahmad M, Li JL, Wang PD, Hozzein WN, Li WJ (2020) Environmental perspectives of microplastic pollution in the aquatic environment: a review. Marine Life Sci Technol 2:414–430 Almajed A, Lemboye K, Moghal AAB (2022) A critical review on the feasibility of synthetic polymers inclusion in enhancing the geotechnical behavior of soils. Polymers 14(22):5004 Bhattacharjee J, Mishra S, Das AP (2021) Recent advances in sensor-based detection of toxic dyes for bioremediation application: a review. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2021:1–20. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/S12010-021-03767-7 Das A, Ghosh S (2022) Role of microorganisms in extenuation of mining and industrial wastes. Geomicrobiol J 39:173–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490451.2022.2038953 Das AP, Dutta K, Khatun R, Behera ID, Singh S, Mishra S (2023) Microfiber pollution and its microbial mitigation: a review on current trends and future prospects. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2023.105104 Das AP, Ghosh S, Mohanty S, Sukla LB (2015) Advances in manganese pollution and its bioremediation. In: Sukla LB, Pradhan N, Panda S, Mishra BK (Eds), Environmental microbe biotechnology (1st ed., pp 313–328). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19018-1_16 Das AP, Mishra S (2009) Hexavalent chromium [Cr (VI)]: yellow water pollution and its remediation. Sarovar Saurabh ENVIS Newsl Wetl Ecosyst 5(2) Das AP, Sukla LB, Pradhan N, Nayak S (2011) Manganese biomining: a review. Biores Technol 102(16):7381–7387. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIORTECH.2011.05.018 Das AP, Swain S (2013) Algal Biosorption of toxic dye Methylene blue. A Potential source of food, feed, biochemicals, biofuels and biofertilizers, international conference on algal biorefinery. Indian Inst of Technol Das AP, Ghosh S (2023) Manganese mining microorganisms. Elsevier Dey S, Tripathy B, Kumar MS, Das AP (2023) Ecotoxicological consequences of manganese mining pollutants and their biological remediation. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol.https://doi.org/10.1016/ J.ENCECO.2023.01.001 Ghosh S, Das AP (2017) Bioleaching of manganese from mining waste residues using Acinetobacter sp. Geol Ecol Landscapes 1(2):77–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2017.1332847 Ghosh S, Kumar MS, Bal B, Das AP (2018) Application of bioengineering in revamping human health. Synthetic biology: omics tools and their applications, 21–37.https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-981-10-8693-9_2 Lahiri D, Nag M, Dey A, Sarkar T, Joshi S, Pandit S, Das AP, Pati S, Pattanaik S, Tilak VK, Ray RR (2021) Biofilm mediated degradation of petroleum products. Geomicrobiology J, 1–10.https:// doi.org/10.1080/01490451.2021.1968979 Mallick K, Sahu A, Dubey NK, Das AP (2023) Harvesting marine plastic pollutants-derived renewable energy: a comprehensive review on applied energy and sustainable approach. J Environ Manag 348:119371. ISSN 0301-4797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119371 Mishra S, Das AP (2008) Hexavalent chromium reduction and 16S rDNA identification of bacteria isolated from a Cr (VI) contaminated site. Int J Microbiol 7(1) Mishra S, Das AP (2021) Current treatment technologies for removal of microplastic and microfiber pollutants from wastewater. Wastewater treatment: cutting-edge molecular tools, techniques and applied aspects, 237–251.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821881-5.00011-8

72

S. Moharana et al.

Mishra S, Das AP (2022) Treatment of the wastewater polluted with synthetic microfiber released from washing machine. In: Das BB, Hettiarachchi H, Sahu PK, Nanda S (eds), Lecture notes in civil engineering (Vol 207, pp 109–117). Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-7509-6_9/COVER Mishra S, Das AP (2023) Microbial remediation of synthetic microfiber contaminated wastewater. In: Shah MP (Ed.), Microbial technologies in industrial wastewater treatment (pp 337–350). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2435-6_17 Mishra S, Das AP, Seragadam P (2009) Microbial remediation of hexavalent chromium from chromite contaminated mines of Sukinda Valley, Orissa (India). J Environ Res Dev, 1122–1127 Mishra S, Dash D, Al-Tawaha ARMS, Das AP (2022a) A Review on heavy metal ion adsorption on synthetic microfiber surface in aquatic environments. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 194(10):4639– 4654. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12010-022-04029-W/METRICS Mishra S, Dash D, Das AP (2022b) Detection, characterization and possible biofragmentation of synthetic microfibers released from domestic laundering wastewater as an emerging source of marine pollution. Mar Pollut Bull 185:114254. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2022. 114254 Mishra S, Dash D, Das AP (2023) Aquatic microbial diversity on plastisphere: colonization and potential role in microplastic biodegradation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–12.https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01490451.2023.2209750 Mishra S, Ghosh S, van Hullebusch ED, Singh S, Das AP (2023b) A critical review on the recovery of base and critical elements from electronic waste-contaminated streams using microbial biotechnology. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2023:1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12010-02304440-X Mishra S, Rath, Charan C, Das AP (2019) Marine microfiber pollution: a review on present status and future challenges. Marine Pollut Bulletin 140:188–197.https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOL BUL.2019.01.039 Mishra S, Rout PK, Das AP (2021) Emerging microfiber pollution and its remediation. In: Prasad R (Ed.), Environmental and microbial biotechnology (pp 247–266). Springer, Singapore. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5499-5_9 Mishra S, Singh RP, Rath CC, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: Source, transport and their remediation. J Water Process Eng 38:101612. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JWPE.2020.101612 Mishra S, Singh RP, Rout PK, Das AP (2022) Membrane bioreactor (MBR) as an advanced wastewater treatment technology for removal of synthetic microplastics. Development in wastewater treatment research and processes, 45–60.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-85583-9.00022-3 Mishra S, Swain S, Sahoo M, Mishra S, Das AP (2021) Microbial colonization and degradation of microplastics in aquatic ecosystem: a review. Geomicrobiology J.https://doi.org/10.1080/014 90451.2021.1983670 Mohanty M, Mohanty J, Dey S, Dutta K, Shah PM, Das AP (2024) The face mask: a tale from protection to pollution and demanding sustainable solution. Emerg Contam 10(2):100298. ISSN 2405-6650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emcon.2023.100298 Paul A, Dey S, Ram DK, Das AP (2023) Hexavalent chromium pollution and its sustainable management through bioremediation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–11.https://doi.org/10.1080/014 90451.2023.2218377 Prabhakar A, Mishra S, Das AP (2019) Isolation and identification of lead (Pb) solubilizing bacteria from automobile waste and its potential for recovery of lead from end of life waste batteries. Geomicrobiological J 36(10):894–903. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490451.2019.1654044 Pradhan G, Tripathy B, Ram DK, Digal AK, Das AP (2023) Bauxite mining waste pollution and its sustainable management through bioremediation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–10.https://doi.org/ 10.1080/01490451.2023.2235353 Raj K, Das AP (2023) Lead pollution: Impact on environment and human health and approach for a sustainable solution. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol 5:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENCECO. 2023.02.001

4 Identification and Characterization of Microplastic Pollutants …

73

Sahoo PP, Singh S, Rout PK, Mishra S, Das AP (2022) Microbial remediation of plastic pollutants generated from discarded and abandoned marine fishing nets. Biotechnol Gnetic Eng Rev.https:// doi.org/10.1080/02648725.2022.2152629 Singh RP, Mishra S, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: pollution toxicity and remediation. Chemosphere 257:127199. j.chemosphere.2020.127199 Tripathy B, Dash A, Das AP (2022) Detection of environmental microfiber pollutants through vibrational spectroscopic techniques: recent advances of environmental monitoring and future prospects. Critical Rev Analyt Chem, 1–11.https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347.2022.2144994

Chapter 5

Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants in Sediment Samples from Daya River of Odisha State in India for their Appropriate Management Godabari Pradhan, Sudeshna Dey, Sailaja Priyadarsini, M. Santosh Kumar, and Alok Prasad Das

Abstract Microplastics have become a serious threat to the environment, and their adverse effect directly impacts animals and human beings, which has received much global attention. In this work, sediment samples were collected from 21 different collection sites of Daya River on the basis of seasonal variations from the month of September 2022 to March 2023. After collection, the samples were processed through sieving, and visual sorting and underwent the density separation method to analyze the shape, size, and color. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy was used to identify the presence of the type of polymer. Approximately 550 microplastics were recovered from the 21 sample sites, with fibers as the dominant microplastic type. During winter and summer, the number of microplastics is more than 80 per 300 g whereas in the rainy season, there is a decrease in the number of microplastics i.e., approximately 30. The highest concentration of microplastics was found to be blue and white due to the over-dumping of plastic bottles by the people and blue-colored plastics because of the fishing activities by local people. Overall, this study highlighted the presence of microplastics in Daya River sediments and provided a baseline for future studies on microplastic pollution and its prevention. This work demonstrates the identification and quantification of microplastics in sediment samples from the Daya River located in Odisha, India. Keywords Identification · Quantification · Density separation · Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy G. Pradhan · S. Dey · S. Priyadarsini · M. S. Kumar · A. P. Das (B) Department of Life Sciences, Rama Devi Women’s University, Vidya Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India e-mail: [email protected] Department of Biosciences and Bioengineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Bombay, India © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. P. Das et al. (eds.), Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution, Environmental Science and Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51792-1_5

75

76

G. Pradhan et al.

5.1 Introduction Microplastics are a major pollutant out of the increasing ecotoxicological substances in aquatic environments, as well as for human health. In recent years, there has been an increase in environmental concern about various environmental pollutants such as heavy metals (Das and Ghosh 2022; Mishra and Das 2008) microplastics, etc. which create a serious threat to both terrestrial and aquatic environments (Das et al. 2015a, b; Dey et al. 2023; Mishra et al. 2020). Nowadays, microplastics are currently existing in all environmental components and are widely spread across water sediments, rivers soil, and air even in the blood (Das and Mishra 2008; Ghosh et al. 2018). Although these environments are introduced independently; however, they are directly or indirectly linked with each other. A study on plastic pollution in 2020 reveals that there are 9.5 billion metric tons of plastics produced whereas 7.8 billion metric tons of plastics were converted to plastic waste and 1.7 billion metric tons of plastics were recycled (Geyer et al. 2017; Mishra et al. 2019a, b; Singh et al. 2022a, b, c, d). Due to the hydrophobic nature and low recyclable activity, plastic debris has accumulated in large quantities throughout the environment, and is expected that there will be around 15 billion tons of plastics accumulated in landfills by the end of 2050. Discarded plastic pollutants in contact with other environmental pollutants including toxic chemicals (Das and Swain 2013; Bhattacharjee et al. 2021) heavy metals, and biomedical wastes pose an adverse impact on the environment and humans (Mishra et al. 2018). These pollutants along with other environmental contaminants are reported to be hazardous to the environment due to their widespread toxicity (Das et al. 2014; Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c, d). Microplastics can be defined as minute plastic particles smaller than 5 mm in size, which originate from primary and secondary sources Primary microplastics are generated directly in microplastic form. Microplastics along with other metal pollutants, e-waste (Mishra et al. 2023a, b) possess the possibility to be consumed by a wide range of marine biota due to their tiny size and prevalence in both coastal and benthic habitats (Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c, d; Mishra and Das 2022; Raj and Das 2023). Primary sources of microplastics include polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), and polystyrene (PS) particles are designed for commercial uses such as cosmetic and medical products, microfibers are shaded from cloth and other textiles found in textile industries. Several nations, notably Canada and the United States, have outlawed the sale of cosmetic goods containing microplastics because of their harmful effects on the environment. Secondary microplastics are created when plastic debris is broken down by physical, chemical, and biological processes. Plastics became weak, brittle, and fragmented into microplastics due to the photooxidation of plastic which is caused by exposure to ultraviolet (UV). The most likely ways for primary microplastics to enter the aquatic environment are by sewage discharge from homes or spills of plastic resin powders or pellets used for air blasting. Application of synthetic fiber-containing sewage sludge or sedimented microplastics from personal care or household items to land is also an important source of primary microplastics (Besseling et al., 2017; Ballent

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

77

et al., 2016). The most frequently discovered pollutants are reported from washing machine effluents and synthetic textiles. Due to the significant number of microplastic wastes that are released into the environment, secondary sources of microplastics are regarded as a major source of microplastic pollution. During the collection and disposal of municipal solid trash, secondary microplastics that are a byproduct of anthropogenic activities, such as littering, are discharged. By way of surface runoff, soil erosion, or wind dispersion, these huge plastic items and their degraded byproducts may enter aquatic habitats (Allouzi et al., 2021; Ambrosini et al., 2019; Alves et al., 2020). According to recent studies, agriculture is one of the main human activity that contributes to soil microplastic contamination, both because it uses agricultural plastics such plastic mulches to increase crop production and because it applies sewage sludge as a soil amendment. Furthermore, there is data that indicates that road markings and tires may potentially contribute to microplastic pollution, with stormwater runoff serving as a major conduit for the transmission of tire and road wear particles (TRWP) to surface waters. Furthermore, recent research has shown that air fallout has been used to carry significant volumes of fibers, particularly in densely populated areas. Possible sources of airborne microplastics include Synthetic fibers from clothes and houses, waste incineration, artificial turf, and landfills are the major sources of airborne microplastics. These atmospheric particles can either be deposited in the terrestrial environment or carried by the wind to the aquatic environment. It is estimated that each year, coastal nations release between 4.8 and 12.7 million metric tons of unwanted plastic debris into the ocean (Zambrano et al. 2019). Some studies expect that the annual growth rate of plastics in the form of increasing manner i.e., approximately 3.7% between the period of 2020–2027, whereas it will increase up to 15% by the end of 2050. Microplastic ingestion by a range of species can compromise energy reserves and can bio-accumulate and bio-magnify through the food chain. Moreover, due to their relatively large surface area and hydrophobic composition, they are prone to adsorbing many substances including heavy metals, and may transfer priority pollutants, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polychlorinated biphenyls, to aquatic life (Cole et al., 2011; Ding et al., 2020). The sorption behavior of persistent organic pollutants with changing water quality parameters and polymer types has been the subject of research, especially, over the last few years. Despite the potential adverse impacts of microplastics on both marine biota and human health (Das and Singh 2011), the methodology for isolating, detecting, identifying, and quantifying microplastics in environmental samples is still lacking in precision. Moreover, no standard operating protocol currently exists for the detection of these rapidly emerging pollutants. One of the fundamental challenges before the identification of microplastics is their separation from the initial matrix. In a review by Hildalgo-Ruz et al. in order to isolate microplastics from sand-based samples, most previously published studies rely on density separation using sodium chloride (NaCl), sodium iodide (NaI), or sodium polytungstate (SPT) solutions. However, plastics such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) have a density greater than saturated NaCl solution. Moreover, denser salt solutions such as

78

G. Pradhan et al.

NaI or SPT are frequently considered too expensive to be used for the bulk separation of large sample volumes. In comparison with visual sorting using a microscope, FT-IR spectroscopy has been shown to detect a significantly higher number of microplastics within environmental samples FT-IR spectroscopy is a desirable technique for the identification of microplastics for several reasons, including efficiency of cost, reliability, and ease of use (Stockin et al. 2021). Additionally, Infrared spectroscopy is nondestructive and the functional groups of different plastic types have already been established. Because of these attributes, FT-IR analyses have been successfully used for identifying microplastics in both sediment and water samples. By using microFT-IR, infrared bands can now be identified and compared with increasingly smaller samples due to the improvement in spatial resolution. Micro-FT-IR is particularly useful as it requires little sample preparation and can be used to identify microplastics directly on membrane filters (Dris et al., 2017; Dalili et al., 2019). Micro-FT-IR analyses of plastics can be performed in either transmission or reflectance mode. Their chemical characterization is needed to understand the sources, occurrence, and the anthropogenic influence on the bodies of water. The various biological processes involved in the degradation of numerous environmental pollutants including plastics present in the ecosystems (Das et al. 2015a; Ghosh et al. 2016a, b; Ghosh and Das 2017; Mohanty et al. 2017). The use of microbial biological remediation for the removal of synthetic microfiber-contaminated wastewater is a more effective and cost-effective alternative compared to conventional wastewater treatment procedures (Das et al. 2012; Ghosh et al. 2016a, b; Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c, d). The acid leaching of the pollutants (Das et al. 2012; Ghosh and Das 2018; Sanket et al. 2016) embraces abrasion and physical alternations of plastic fragments but also changes their chemical structure. Therefore, scientists have challenges in developing new technology that emphasizes the total removal of various types of pollutants released from various metal, textile, and petroleum industries (Lahiri et al. 2021) and poses a negative impact on both land and water ecosystems as well as on human health (Das et al. 2011; Mishra et al. 2019a, b, 2021). To determine the true ecological impact of this contamination, scientists must find out, characterize, and evaluate synthetic fibers using modern microscopic and spectroscopic methods (Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c, d; Tripathy et al. 2022). However, among the decontamination procedures, microbial remediation offers far-reaching progressive possibilities to remediate the pollutants (Mishra, Dash, et al. 2023a, b; Mishra and Das 2023; Paul et al. 2023; Pradhan et al. 2023). This work defines the (i) collection and identification of sediment samples, from various locations of Daya River (ii) quantification of the collected samples through various methods such as sieving, visual sorting, and density separation (iii) Microscopic visualization and characterization of collected samples through Fourier Transform Spectroscopy (FTIR).

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

79

5.2 Materials and Methods 5.2.1 Sampling Location and Sample Collection The Daya River starts as a branch of the Kuakhai River at Saradeipur in Odisha, India. This river is joined with the aid of the Malaguni River below Golabai and flows in the districts of Khordha and Puri. This river travels approximately 37 km from its origin and falls into the northeastern corner of Chilika Lake. This river is geographically located at latitude 19° 59, 31,, north and longitude 85° 38, 1,, east. Sampling was done from September 2022 to March 2023 for about 7 months. Around 20 km was covered and 21 sediment samples were collected from different location on the bank of the river on the basis of the season and month. The sampling process was performed by maintaining a distance of 1 km between two sampling points. Before collecting the sample, the depth of the sample size was measured and was collected in a square transect of each 16 cm × 16 cm quadrant. The samples were collected manually by sterile metallic mason trowel and poured into the sterile glass jar. Samples were marked with respect to location, and date of sampling and brought into the laboratory for further processes. Most of the samples were collected from the edges of the river bank. From each sampling site, approximately 100 g of sediment was collected either from the surface or up to 2–3 cm of the surface layer. GPS map camera was used for capturing photos of samples and the location of the sampling site by mentioning their coordinates. Table 5.1. Shows the sampling location, month of sample collection, groups, longitude and latitude of the collection site and Table 5.2 Shows the season of sample collection, depth, color, size and total number of microplastics.

5.2.2 Sieving and Visual Sorting Microplastics were separated from the dried sediment sample by using a sieving process. Samples retained in the sieve were collected properly and stored separately. A sterile steel sieve having a 500 mm mesh size was used to obtain two types of fractions of substances. The collected samples from the sieving process were separated and manually sorted by the process of visual sorting. Visual examination of the collected samples was processed to separate the collected microplastics from organic or inorganic matter residues and was washed thoroughly using distilled water. On the basis of the color and size, samples were categorized into different colors and sizes.

80

G. Pradhan et al.

Table 5.1 This table demonstrate the sampling location, months, groups, longitude, and latitude of the collection sites Sl. no

Sampling location

Month

Groups

September

A

Longitude

Latitude

1

Lingipur

85.8564

20.2088

2

Samantarapur

85.8543

20.2091

3

Nathapur

85.8478

20.2111

4

Krushnapur

85.8412

20.2126

5

Nuagaon

October

B

85.8404

20.2128

6

Dihapur

85.8329

20.2104

7

Dadhibamanpur

85.8331

20.2101

8

Bikipur

85.8322

20.2084

9

Jaypur

85.8328

20.2046

November

December

C

10

Itipur

85.8359

20.2025

11

Radhamohanpur

D

85.8372

20.2016

12

Khatuapada

85.8389

20.1971

13

Palashpur

85.8358

20.1946

14

Basantapur

85.8314

20.1806

15

Tikarapada

85.8279

20.1754

January

February

E

16

Kalyanpursasan

85.8249

20.1606

17

Suabarei

85.8245

20.1588

18

Poparanga

85.8212

20.1478

March

F

19

Dhauli

85.8372

20.1944

20

Krushnapur

G

85.8446

20.2104

21

Gobardhanpur

85.8398

20.1992

5.2.3 Organic Matter Digestion Samples were treated with 30% H2 O2 solution to remove the mud and organic matter present inside the plastic samples. The solution was stirred using magnetic stir plates at room temperature for at least 30 min. The organic content of the sediment sample was digested. The supernatant was poured into a beaker collected through Whatman filter paper and left to dry for further experiment.

5.2.4 Density Separation The density separation process was performed to differentiate low-density to higherdensity particles by using saturated NaCl solution, 178 g of salt was added to a beaker with 500 ml of water, and then the dried samples were added to the solution. The beaker containing the sample with saturated NaCl was stirred thoroughly with a glass

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

81

Table 5.2 Shows the season of sample collection, depth, color, size and total number of microplastics Group

Season

Number of microplastics per 100gm

Net microplastics in different seasons

Depth of surface

Color of microplastics

Size in (cm)

A

Rainy

4 to 5

17 to 20

2.0 cm

Blue, Pink, White

0.5,1.0, 0.7

Blue, Pink

1.2, 0.2, 0.5

B

Rainy

10 to 11

2.0 cm

3 to 4

On surface

3 to 4

9 to 11

_

1.0 cm

6 to 7 C

D

Winter

Winter

12 to 15

1.2 cm 40 to45

On surface

2 to 5

On surface

26 to 28

78 to88

F

G

Summer

Summer

25 to 26

On surface

2.0 cm 1.2 cm

3 to 5

On surface 111 to 115

On surface

35 to 36

On surface

42 to 43

On surface

35 to 36

Blue, White

1.7, 0.2, 0.5

Green, Blue, Pink

0.3, 0.6, 1.3

Purple, Black

2.5,1.1

Blue

1.5, 1.6, 2.4

2.3 cm 49 to 54

21 to 23

35 to 36

Yellow, White 2.0,1.1 Purple

On surface

21 to 25 Winter

2.0 cm

23 to 25

31 to 35

E

On surface

144 to 156

On surface

35 to 36

2.0 cm

42 to 43

On surface

82

G. Pradhan et al.

rod for 5 min. The mixture was allowed to settle for 24 h, and the supernatant was then decanted into a clean glass beaker. The flotation procedure using the saturated sodium chloride solution was repeated three times. The process was repeated for the extraction of microplastics from all the sediment samples. This method allowed the microplastic particles to get separated on the basis of their density differences.

5.2.5 Fourier Transform Spectroscopy (FTIR) Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy is an analytical technique used for the identification of microplastic structures and the different types of polymers. The dried was examined using PerkinElmer Spectrum Version 10.4.3 (Spectrum II) where the particles were scanned to know about the presence of different types of functional groups present in the collected samples. An IR beam is directly reflected in the sample and the graph was displayed on a computer screen with the process of internal reflection.

5.3 Result and Discussion 5.3.1 Sample Location and Collection Sampling was performed on the Daya River, which starts as a branch of the Kuakhai River in Odisha state of India by maintaining a 1 km distance between two sampling stations. A total number of 21 samples were collected throughout the sampling process and a total of 20 km was covered within seven months from September to March. The actual image of the sampling site on different seasons shows the abundance of plastic particles. This particular region was selected for sampling due to the abundance of human activities and sewage effluents which leads to the accumulation of a huge number of anthropogenic pollutants. Studies of microplastic have shown there to be an abundance of litter being transported down the Daya River and finally in Chilika. with the presence of microplastics in river sediments. Figure 5.1 shows the geographical map and sampling site of the Daya River in the Odisha state of India. Samples were marked in a square transect of each 16 cm × 16 cm quadrant collected by a sterile metallic mason trowel and poured into the sterile glass jar. Disposable sterilized gloves, aprons, and sanitizer were used for the collection of samples to avoid contamination. Figure 5.2 shows the different sampling sites of the Daya River in the Odisha state of India. A study by (Wright et al. 2021) observed the prevalence of knots in the braided rope samples indicating that they were once part of fishing nets.

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

83

Fig. 5.1 Shows the Geographical map of the sampling site of the Daya River in the Odisha state of India

Fig. 5.2 Shows the different sampling sites of the Daya River in the Odisha state of India

5.3.2 Sieving and Visual Sorting Sieving is the most commonly used approach for separating supernatant containing microplastics from sediment samples. After the sieving process, the microplastics are get categorized into different sizes. Through manual visual sorting of microplastics, the sample were divided into different colors of microplastics like blue (30%), pink (22%), white (17%), yellow (6%), purple (12%), green (7%), and black (6%) were

84

G. Pradhan et al.

obtained from the sampling site and are represented in figure. The percentage of these colored samples reveals that the blue-colored microplastics are distributed abundantly. The order of the number of microplastics on the basis of their color was blue > pink > white > purple > green > black = yellow. Besides it is easier for intake by aquatic microorganisms resulting in the amassing of noxious wastes, thereby disturbing the physical function and also affecting human life after consumption.

5.3.3 Density Separation Density separation is a gravity-approaching separation process. This process is done for the separation of lower-density particles from higher-density particles at a specific separating density regardless of size, shape, and other secondary influences. Microplastics tend to float on the water surface due to their lower density than water. The target component and impurities can be separated by density according to their density differences. To be specific, for density separation, the flotation solution consisting of NaCl was added to the solution containing microplastic samples, and then the supernatant was separated. Nearly 480 per 550 g of microplastic particles were separated from the solution and are shown in Fig. 5.3.

Fig. 5.3 Represents the density separation method of Microplastics

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

85

5.3.4 Organic Matter Separation Environmental samples contain biological materials that are often present within the microplastics, resulting in the overestimation of environmental concentrations and increasing the number of microplastics subjected to further analysis. The objective of digestion is to remove organic impurities that interfere with the identification of microplastics. It is widely used in the preparation of biological, sewage, and sludge samples. Three common methods are used for the sample pretreatment, such as enzymatic digestion, alkaline digestion, and acid digestion. In particular, for enzymatic digestion, which is a time-consuming process, each enzyme works under its optimal temperature and pH condition. Dried samples with 30% H2 O2 were added to remove the organic matter and the samples were left for drying for identification under the microscope. The extracted microplastics after the processes are represented in Fig. 5.4 and the percentage of samples based upon their color and sizes is represented in Figs. 5.5 and 5.6.

5.3.5 Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) is one of the most common spectroscopic methods that identify microplastics. This spectroscopy occurs by vibrational measurement in FTIR. Molecule vibrations are detected by FTIR and determine the characteristic features of the material. The chemical structure of polymers is measured and compared with a reference spectrum which is recorded by the software in FTIR; thus, the result becomes accurate. FTIR analysis was done after a visual inspection of each microparticle. During microscope analysis, possible microplastic particles were manually collected from the filter papers and saved for FTIR analysis. Out of all microplastics, the number of HDPE type of microplastics was more and the polymer type, avtex Celanese, avlin, poly appeared. The FTIR graph has been demonstrated in Fig. 5.7. There were many microparticles identified as organics during the FTIR spectroscopy that were previously observed as possible microplastics during the microscope analysis.

5.4 Management Strategies for Plastic Wastes With the world’s economic development and population expansion, plastic garbage is rapidly created and exposed. Man-made activities (operational sectors and climatic conditions, industrial expansion, socioeconomic development) and natural processes of living organisms create a large amount of both biodegradable and nonbiodegradable trash. Different methods and environmental safety laws guidelines have been adopted by government municipalities, social communities, and local

86

G. Pradhan et al.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Fig. 5.4 Represents the extracted microplastics after the density Separation Method

authorities to guide the populace in disposing of plastic garbage after use. Among these waste management strategies, several are scientifically based, such as recycling, incineration, bioremediation, and landfills (Singh et al. 2020). These methods are established to have a clean environment and good plastic waste disposal. The waste incineration process refers to the complete combustion of wastes in oxygen, which exposes water molecules and carbon dioxide to the environment (Mishra and Das 2022). The trash generated by incineration is made up of several volatile compounds, ash, and a trace of hydrochloric acid. In general, not all plastic garbage is suitable for burning; some are resistant to oxygen heating and explosives. The burning of organic

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

87

PERCENTAGE OF THE SAMPLE Green

Yellow

White 4% 9%

Blue 4%

20%

orange

red

24%

39%

Fig. 5.5 Shows the Percentage of Samples based on their colour

Fig. 5.6 Represents the size distribution of collected samples

molecules may also provide energy, which is known as fuel. Fuels can be offered in many physical forms such as liquid, solid, and gas for use in cars and airplane propulsion. Rather than producing energy, this process of burning has various good effects on society. It also makes significant contributions to trash reduction and the generation of power from waste, both of which are critical in modern manufacturing. Waste

88

G. Pradhan et al.

Fig. 5.7 Shows the FTIR graph of the presence of bonds in the collected sample

incineration has played a significant part in the production of sustainable energy from biomass resources. Recycling is a waste management process that gathers waste items and turns them into raw materials that may be reused to create other valuable goods. It is also known as “renewing or reusing” to avoid negative effects on society and environmental conservation (Das and Ghosh, 2023, Mallick et al., 2023, Mohanty et al., 2023). As carbon-based goods and other polymers, plastics are non-biodegradable. It comprises bottles and other materials that may be melted and turned into other goods such as plastic tables and chairs. Among the benefits of plastic waste recycling that the world can gain when plastic is reused rather than disposed of in undesirable places is the maintenance of human life by reducing carbon dioxide and other harmful gases in the environment, which can occur during waste incineration or combustion (Mishra et al. 2020). It maintains landfill space and reduces the requirement for fossil fuel usage. Furthermore, it encourages a sustainable lifestyle and helps the national economy. Bioremediation is also a type of technology that focuses on detoxification and decontamination by employing microorganisms to biodegrade all-natural substances that may be handled using biodegradation of plants, algae, fungus, and bacteria (Sahoo et al. 2022). It requires several parameters for the culture medium, such as nutrients, enzymes, pressure, and temperature, all of which must be optimized to allow microorganisms to proliferate. The bioremediation procedure will not be effective in the absence of any of the aforementioned components or in the presence of growth inhibitors. Plastic polymers can be separated and biodegraded by microorganisms using their specific enzymes as a chemical catalyst which lowers the activation energy and transforms the substrate into the product (Sahoo et al., 2022).

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

89

5.5 Conclusion Microplastics, tiny particles of plastic debris found in the environment, are becoming a major concern worldwide. The Daya River, a major and prime waterway in India, is not immune to this issue. The river is heavily contaminated with microplastics which is concerning for both the environment and public health. Plastic packaging is the largest part with low-density polyethylene as the polymer type that is dominant of all types of polymers present. This study provides an overview of the current state of the science, discussing the effects of plastic pollution, transport mechanisms, and types of plastic and providing an outlook for future research. The microplastics in the Daya River have been found to come from a variety of sources, including the improper disposal of plastic waste, the washing of synthetic clothing, and plastic products like bottles and bags. These tiny particles can be harmful to aquatic life, contaminate the food chain, and even pose a risk to human health if consumed. It is important for individuals and businesses to take action to reduce plastic waste and properly dispose of plastic products to prevent further contamination of water bodies.

References Allouzi MMA, Tang DYY, Chew KW, Rinklebe J, Bolan N, Allouzi SMA et al (2021) Micro (nano) plastic pollution: the ecological influence on soil-plant system and human health. Sci Total Environ 788:147815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147815 Alves TF, Morsink M, Batain F, Chaud MV, Almeida T, Fernandes DA et al (2020). Applications of natural, semi-synthetic, and synthetic polymers in cosmetic formulations. Cosmetics Ambrosini R, Azzoni RS, Pittino F, Diolaiuti G, Franzetti A, Parolini M (2019) First evidence of microplastic contamination in the supraglacial debris of an alpine glacier. Environ Pollut 253:297–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.07.005 Ballent A., Corcoran PL, Madden O, Helm PA, Longstaffe FJ (2016) Sources and sinks of microplastics in Canadian Lake Ontario nearshore, tributary and beach sediments. Marine Pollut Bull 110(1):383–395 Besseling E, Foekema EM, Van Den Heuvel-Greve MJ, Koelmans AA (2017) The effect of microplastic on the uptake of chemicals by the lugworm Arenicola marina (L.) under environmentally relevant exposure conditions. Environ Sci Technol 51:8795–8804. https://doi.org/ 10.1021/acs.est.7b02286 Bhattacharjee J, Mishra S, Das AP (2021) Recent advances in sensor-based detection of toxic dyes for bioremediation application: a review. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2021:1–20. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/S12010-021-03767-7 Cole M, Lindeque P, Halsband C, Galloway TS (2011) Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: a review. Mar Pollut Bull 62:2588–2597 Dalili A, Samiei E, Hoorfar M (2019) A review of sorting, separation and isolation of cells and microbeads for biomedical applications: microfluidic approaches. Analyst 144:87–113. https:// doi.org/10.1039/C8AN01061G14 Das AP, Kumar PS, Swain S (2014) Recent advances in biosensor based Bioelectronics 51:62–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOS.2013.07.020 Das AP, Ghosh S, Mohanty S, Sukla LB (2015) Consequences of manganese compounds: a review. Toxicol Environ Chem 96(7):981–997. https://doi.org/10.1080/02772248.2015.1005428.

90

G. Pradhan et al.

Das A, Ghosh S (2022) Role of microorganisms in extenuation of mining and industrial wastes. Geomicrobiol J 39:173–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490451.2022.2038953 Das AP, Ghosh S (2023) Manganese mining microorganisms. Elsevier. Das AP, Ghosh S, Mohanty S, Sukla LB (2015a) Advances in manganese pollution and its bioremediation. In: Sukla LB, x Pradhan LB, Panda S, Mishra BK (Eds), Environmental microbe biotechnology (1st ed., pp 313–328). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19018-1_ 16 Das AP, Ghosh S, Mohanty S, Sukla LB (2015c) Consequences of manganese compounds: a review. Toxicol Environ Chem 96(7):981–997. https://doi.org/10.1080/02772248.2015.1005428 Das AP, Mishra S (2008) Hexavalent Chromium (VI): Health hazards and environmental pollutant. J Environ Res Dev 2(3):386–392 Das AP, Singh S (2011) Occupational health assessment of chromite toxicity among Indian miners. Indian J Occup Environ Med 15(1):6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5278.82998 Das AP, Sukla LB, Pradhan N, Nayak S (2011) Manganese biomining: a review. Biores Technol 102(16):7381–7387. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIORTECH.2011.05.018 Das AP, Swain S (2013) Algal biosorption of toxic dye methylene blue. A potential source of food, feed, biochemicals, biofuels and biofertilizers, international conference on algal biorefinery. Indian Inst Technol, 13 Das AP, Swain S, Panda S, Pradhan N, Sukla LB (2012) Reductive acid leaching of low grade manganese ores. Geomaterials 2012(04):70–72. https://doi.org/10.4236/GM.2012.24011 Dey S, Tripathy B, Kumar MS, Das AP (2023) Ecotoxicological consequences of manganese mining pollutants and their biological remediation. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol. https://doi.org/10.1016/ J.ENCECO.2023.01.001 Ding N, An D, Yin X, Sun Y (2020) Detection and evaluation of microbeads and other microplastics in wastewater treatment plant samples. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:15878–15887. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11356-020-08127-2 Dris R, Gasperi J, Mirande C, Mandin C, Guerrouache M, Langlois V, Tassin B (2017) A first overview of textile fibers, including microplastics, in indoor and outdoor environments. Environ Pollut 221:453–458 Geyer R, Jambeck JR, Law KL (2017) Production, use, and fate of all plastics everMade. Sci Adv 3:e1700782 Ghosh S, Das AP (2017) Bioleaching of manganese from mining waste residues using Acinetobacter sp. Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes 1(2):77–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2017.133 2847 Ghosh S, Das AP (2018) Metagenomic insights into the microbial diversity in manganesecontaminated mine tailings and their role in biogeochemical cycling of manganese. Scientific Reports 8(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26311-w Ghosh S, Kumar MS, Bal B, Das AP (2018) Application of bioengineering in revamping human health. Synthetic Biology Omics Tools Appl 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-869 3-9_2 Ghosh S, Mohanty S, Akcil A, Sukla LB, Das AP (2016a) A greener approach for resource recycling: Manganese bioleaching. Chemosphere 154:628–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHEMOS PHERE.2016.04.028 Ghosh S, Mohanty S, Nayak S, Sukla LB, Das AP (2016b) Molecular identification of indigenous manganese solubilising bacterial biodiversity from manganese mining deposits. J Basic Microbiol 56(3):254–262. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOBM.201500477 Lahiri D, Nag M, Dey A, Sarkar T, Joshi S, Pandit S, Das AP, Pati S, Pattanaik S, Tilak VK, Ray RR (2021) Biofilm mediated degradation of petroleum products. Geomicrobiology J, 1–10. https:// doi.org/10.1080/01490451.2021.1968979 Mallick K, Sahu A, Dubey NK, Das AP (2023) Harvesting marine plastic pollutants-derived renewable energy: a comprehensive review on applied energy and sustainable approach. J Environ Manag 348:119371. ISSN 0301-4797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119371

5 Characterization and Quantification of Microplastics Pollutants …

91

Mishra S, Rout PK, Das AP (2019a) Solar photovoltaic panels as next generation waste: a review. Biointerface Res Appl Chem 9(6):4539–4546 Mishra S, Singh RP, Rout PK, Das AP (2022) Membrane bioreactor (MBR) as an advanced wastewater treatment technology for removal of synthetic microplastics. Development in Wastewater Treatment Research and Processes, Elsevier Mishra S, Dash D, Subhadarsini S (2018) Antibacterial activity assessment of native fungus isolated from chromite mines of Sukinda, Odisha. Int J Sci Res (IJSR) 8:1628–1631. https://doi.org/10. 21275/ART20202828 Mishra S, Singh RP, Rath CC, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: source, transport and their remediation. J Water Process Eng 38:101612. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JWPE.2020.101612 Mishra S, Das AP (2008) Hexavalent chromium reduction and 16S rDNA identification of bacteria isolated from a Cr (VI) contaminated site. Int J Microbiol 7(1) Mishra S, Das AP (2022) Treatment of the wastewater polluted with synthetic microfiber released from washing machine. In: Das BB, Hettiarachchi H, Sahu PK, Nanda S (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering (Vol 207, pp 109–117). Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-7509-6_9/COVER Mishra S, Das AP (2023) microbial remediation of synthetic microfiber contaminated wastewater. In: Shah MP (Ed.), Microbial technologies in industrial wastewater treatment (pp 337–350). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2435-6_17 Mishra S, Dash D, Al-Tawaha ARMS, Das AP (2022b) A review on heavy metal ion adsorption on synthetic microfiber surface in aquatic environments. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 194(10):4639– 4654. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12010-022-04029-W/METRICS Mishra S, Dash D, Das AP (2022c) Detection, characterization and possible biofragmentation of synthetic microfibers released from domestic laundering wastewater as an emerging source of marine pollution. Mar Pollut Bull 185:114254. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2022. 114254 Mishra S, Dash D, Das AP (2023) Aquatic microbial diversity on plastisphere: colonization and potential role in microplastic biodegradation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01490451.2023.2209750 Mishra S, Ghosh S, van Hullebusch ED, Singh S, Das AP (2023b) A critical review on the recovery of base and critical elements from electronic waste-contaminated streams using microbial biotechnology. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2023:1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12010-02304440-X Mishra S, Rath, Charan C, Das AP (2019) Marine microfiber pollution: a review on present status and future challenges. Marine Pollut Bulletin 140:188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOL BUL.2019.01.039 Mishra S, Rout PK, Das AP (2021) emerging microfiber pollution and its remediation. In: Prasad R (Ed.), Environmental and microbial biotechnology (pp 247–266). Springer, Singapore. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5499-5_9 Mishra S, Singh RP, Rout PK, Das AP (2022) Membrane bioreactor (MBR) as an advanced wastewater treatment technology for removal of synthetic microplastics. Development in wastewater treatment research and processes, 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-85583-9.00022-3 Mohanty S, Ghosh S, Nayak S, Das AP (2017) Bioleaching of manganese by Aspergillus sp. isolated from mining deposits. Chemosphere 172:302–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHEMOSPHERE. 2016.12.136 Mohanty M, Mohanty J, Dey S, Dutta K, Shah MP, Das AP (2024) The face mask: a tale from protection to pollution and demanding sustainable solution. Emerg Contam 10(2):100298. ISSN 2405-6650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emcon.2023.100298 Paul A, Dey S, Ram DK, Das AP (2023). Hexavalent chromium pollution and its sustainable management through bioremediation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/014 90451.2023.2218377

92

G. Pradhan et al.

Pradhan G, Tripathy B, Ram DK, Digal AK, Das AP (2023) Bauxite mining waste pollution and its sustainable management through bioremediation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–10. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/01490451.2023.2235353 Raj K, Das AP (2023) Lead pollution: Impact on environment and human health and approach for a sustainable solution. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol 5:79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENCECO. 2023.02.001 Sahoo PP, Singh S, Rout PK, Mishra S, Das AP (2022) Microbial remediation of plastic pollutants generated from discarded and abandoned marine fishing nets. Biotechnol Gnetic Eng Rev. https:// doi.org/10.1080/02648725.2022.2152629 Sanket AS, Ghosh S, Sahoo R, Nayak S, Das AP (2016) Molecular identification of acidophilic manganese (Mn)-solubilizing bacteria from mining effluents and their application in mineral beneficiation. Geomicrobiological Journal 34(1):71–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490451. 2016.1141340 Singh RP, Mishra S, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: Pollution toxicity and remediation. Chemosphere 257:127199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127199 Stockin KA, Pantos O, Betty EL, Pawley MDM, Doake F, Masterton H, Palmer EI, Perrott MR, Nelms SE, Machovsky-Capuska GE (2021) Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) analysis identifies microplastics in stranded common dolphins (Delphinus delphis) from New Zealand waters. Mar Pollut Bull 173:113084. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2021.113084 Tripathy B, Dash A, Das AP (2022) Detection of environmental microfiber pollutants through vibrational spectroscopic techniques: recent advances of environmental monitoring and future prospects. Critical Rev Analyt Chem, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347.2022.2144994 Wright LS, Napper IE, Thompson RC (2021) Potential microplastic release from beached fishing gear in Great Britain’s region of highest fishing litter density. Mar Pollut Bull 173:113115. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2021.113115 Zambrano MC, Pawlak JJ, Daystar J, Ankeny M, Cheng JJ, Venditti RA (2019) Microfibers generated from the laundering of cotton, rayon and polyester based fabrics and their aquatic biodegradation. Mar Pollut Bull 142:394–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2019. 02.062

Chapter 6

Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked to Sustainable Development Suman Jagatee, Sujata Priyadarshini, Chandi Charan Rath, and Alok Prasad Das

Abstract Synthetic textiles emit microfibers into the environment at every stage, including production, usage, and disposal at the end of their useful lives. Microfiber pollution poses a potentially significant and growing concern to the environment, necessitating industry protection and sustainable growth. As it relates to the terrestrial ecosystem, the buildup of microfibers leachates to contaminate the environment and more particularly the groundwater, which has a detrimental ecotoxicological effect on the rhizosphere, microbiota, and plants. Plastic waste dumped into water sources breaks down over time into tiny pieces to form micro and nanosized plastics. Owing to their small size, which ranges from 0.05 to 5 mm, aquatic creatures frequently eat them accidentally. As a result, broad microfiber infiltration poses a hazard to life forms in both terrestrial and aquatic environments. In addition, the ease with which microplastics bond to other metals and chemicals acts as a vehicle for the introduction of harmful compounds into living things. In the modern day, new contaminants like polyethylene, polypropylene, and polystyrene pose a serious threat to the health of the entire microbiome. These synthetic clothes, which are frequently worn by today’s metropolitan population, account for up to 35% of microfiber pollution. High rate of emission and pervasiveness in nature, management of these synthetic fabric contaminants is crucial. These microfibers enter the oceans through river streams and wastewater treatment facilities after being released into home drainage systems. From textile production to consumer use, microfiber fleeces must be addressed throughout the entire textile lifecycle. Collaborative techniques should be developed to stop pollution at the source. The evaluation and management of microfiber release at sources, which will lower emissions into the environment, are highly recommended for coordinated developments and sustainable management. This essay gives a broad overview of the sources, modes of transmission, harmful

S. Jagatee (B) · S. Priyadarshini · C. C. Rath · A. P. Das Department of Life Sciences, Rama Devi Women’s University, Vidya Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. P. Das et al. (eds.), Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution, Environmental Science and Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51792-1_6

93

94

S. Jagatee et al.

effects of microfibers, regulatory measures, and cleanup techniques to address the contaminants of the environment, and precise management. Keywords Microfiber · Microbiome · Polyethylene · Polypropylene · Polystyrene

6.1 Introduction Plastics have significantly streamlined our lives by offering a cost-effective and practical alternative, but at the expense of significant environmental risks (Nirmala et al. 2023). They are widely used and in high demand due to their excellent durability and adaptability. The total production of plastic since it was first manufactured in 1950 (15 MT) is expected to reach 34 B T in 2050 (Geyer 2020). According to statistics, there are approximately 50 tons of microplastic (MPs) particles in the ocean, which is roughly five hundred times as many as stars in the cosmos. Plastics hold a crucial character in our daily lives, owing to their comfort, affordability; resourcefulness, and durability, plastics play an important role in our daily lives (Mishra et al. 2021, 2020; Singh et al. 2020). However, due to their excessive use in the packaging industry, pharmaceutical industry, agricultural industry, and other industries, severe environmental damage has been caused, raising serious concerns. When discarded in the environment, plastics can be divided into two categories: micro- and nano-plastics, which have a very limited ability to degrade. As microfibers make up a large portion of MPs and are widely distributed, they may operate as a vehicle for persistent organic pollutants, posing risks to human and environmental health (Mishra and Das 2023; Sunanda Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c). Many factors, including household activities, inappropriate municipal solid waste management, anthropogenic waste, agricultural run-off, industrial waste, etc., are to blame for the buildup of macro and nano plastics in the environment (Mishra and Das 2022; Mishra et al. 2019; Pradhan et al. 2023). According to estimations, eight million tonnes of plastic are added to the oceans each year and makeup about 80% of the trash there. Almost every industry uses it, including those in nutrition, agronomy, medicine, locomotive devices, microelectronics, fashion, construction, and municipal works (Nirmala et al. 2023). Plastics are a premier raw material because of their effectiveness in sealing and proofing liquid goods. As was already mentioned, raw plastic has many uses because it can be molded into any shape, resist extreme temperatures, and be flexible enough to be hard or light. The majority of plastics can be used as packaging or containers. For industries like agronomy, food packaging, clothing, pharmacy, shipping, and the motor industry, among others, plastics, particularly, shipping, and the automotive industry, among others, plastics, particularly polystyrene, and polyethylene, are fundamental and indispensable (Ma et al. 2019). Concerns about accumulation in the body and toxicity are brought up by the ease with which marine and land animals, including human beings, can consume MPs (Padervand et al. 2020). According to Chen et al. 2019, the environment, animals, plants, as well as humans are all seriously harmed by the accumulated plastic in the marine environment colonized by different

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

95

microbes. Plastic wastes come in a wide range of sizes due to the widespread use of plastics in the environment as a result the pollutant issue has led to an upsurge in the responsiveness of the negative environmental effects of cosmetic and beauty products. Although it has many uses, the waste pollution it produces ends up in lakes, the ocean, and on land, and it has a negative impact on biodiversity (Sing and Sharma 2016; Paul et al. 2023). As per Lamichhane et al. 2022, plastic pollution is a major concern because plastic products are difficult to degrade through natural processes, start to gather, and stay non-decomposable entities in the marine ecosystem for eras. Despite the numerous new approaches and execution plans in place to forbid their use, plastics pose an environmental risk to the sphere. Oceans are the sink for plastic entities, and if current trends linger on, it is predicted that by the year 2050, probably there will be more plastic in the oceans than of fish (UN 2017). The physical and chemical changes caused by pressure, temperature, and several other factors cause the plastic products to degrade into smaller pieces over time. According to Nirmala et al. (2023), mechanical integrity decreases due to biotic and abiotic degradation processes which will take between 450 and 1000 years to decompose completely. The contamination of the environment with MPs has becomes a global issue. The sea contains MPs that can be eaten by a variety of marine animals (Santillo et al. 2017). Plastic may eventually build up in the food web and make its way to people (Waring et al. 2018). According to Triebskorn et al. (2019), MPs are a collection of various plastic particles whose diameters range in mm that differ in chemical make-up, colour, form, proportions, and structure, among other qualities (Mishra et al. 2023; Sujata Mishra et al. 2022a, b, c). According to the majority of earlier and current studies, plastics with a thickness of less than 1 mm are classified as nano plastics, those between 1 and 5 mm as MPs, and those over 5 mm as macroplastics (Prüst et al. 2020). For better interpretation and analysis, various investigators have categorized plastics on the basis of their size according to the study’s goals. MPs are broadly divided into primary and secondary types on the basis of their nature from the source of their origin and sink. Primary types are those produced as microspheres or microbeads for use in subsequent industrial processes or as exfoliating agents in place of more conventional forms like charcoal, pumice, almond shells, etc. (Mishra et al. 2023). Due to a variety of external environmental factors, secondary types gradually emerge from larger products (Fig. 6.1). The research on primary and secondary MP pollution in various portable water sources, such as streams, lakes, pools, etc. is presented in this article. This chapter describes a broad overview of the sources, modes of transmission, harmful effects of microfibers, regulatory measures, and cleanup techniques to address the contaminants of the environment and precise management.

96

S. Jagatee et al. 3 7

2 1

35 24

28

2 % Beauty Products 35% Clothing & textiles 24% City dust 3% Marine Coatings

1% Plastics 28% Tyres 7% Road markings

Fig. 6.1 Major and minor sources of microplastics adding up to the environment in day-to-day practices

6.2 Microfibre Categories Ropes, fishing nets, and textiles are examples of microfibre sources based on their shape, whereas microfibers can also be classified as natural, recycled, or synthetic fibers. To yet, the harmful effects of simple nature-obtained fibers on ecosystems, such as cotton and secretory silk, are mainly unknown (Suaria et al. 2020). Synthetic fibers, on the other hand, are comprised of polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyester, and polypropylene (PP). According to Athey and Erdleb (2022), microfibres are classified into three types: synthetic, semi-synthetic, and natural which is depicted in Fig. 6.1. As was previously said, micro, as well as nano plastics (MNPs), may be produced directly or result from the gradual division of bigger plastics; as such, they are typically divided into primary and secondary MNPs. The principal sources of primary MNPs are plastics and microscopic particles contained in personal care items. Synthetic turf, coatings, laundered fabric and effluent, sewage residue, synthetic running tracks in educational institutions, rubberized roads, and vehicular tire erosion

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

97

are also substantial sources of primary MNPs (Smyth et al. 2021). Microbeads are distinct MPs comprised primarily of polyethylene, PP, and polystyrene deliberately added to makeup and certain special care products. MNP microbeads are also employed as film-forming substances, modified polymers, water-attracting agents, and silicones in self-care items and make-ups (Lochhead 2017). Sphericalness and unit size consistency generate a ball-bearing impact, leading to a seamless texture and even distribution, both of which are sought-after qualities in cosmetics (Alves et al. 2020). These micro/nanoparticles can be cryptic, unevenly worn, and filamentous in addition to being spherical. Colored microbeads enhance the photographic attractiveness of special care items as well. They have been recognized as a potentially harmful source of MPs since they flow unimpeded over the plants treating sewage after being rinsed down the drain, eventually ending up in different sources of water bodies (Ding et al. 2020). Microbeads from MNPs are expected to account for eleven percent (2,300 t/a) of the malleable debris discharged into the German Sea (Brzuska et al. 2015). Pre-produced granulated resin balls which are mostly utilized in manufacturing plastic, seem to be a significant source of micro cum nano plastics detritus. These synthetic beads are also byproducts of plastic reprocessing, as they are generated during the purification, pulverization, fusion, classification, and ultimate shaping procedures (Duncan et al. 2018). According to Karbalaei et al. (2018), secondary MNPs are created when macroplastic materials undergo various eco-friendly deprivation procedures, including biodegradation, chemical breakdown, and physical wear, and tear. In this context, it has been observed that city garbage such as agricultural films, polythene bags and containers, fishing equipment, transportation, tire erosion from automobiles, and other substantial plastic refuse are the primary origins of secondary micro- and nano-plastics (MNPs). As per a recent evaluation conducted by An et al. (2020), secondary origins of MNPs are accountable for the bulk of MNPs discovered in both marine and land environments. Due to the growing number of vehicles on the road worldwide, road marking abrasion and tire wear are the greatest common cause of ecological micro and nano plastics (An et al. 2020). Similar to natural fibers, synthetic textiles have been shown to shed considerable amounts of micro and nano plastics during washing, which eventually end up in aquatic sources. According to De Falco et al. (2019), focusing on the type of fabric, roughly 124 to 308 mg of MPs, or 640,000–1,500,000 micro and nano plastic particles, are discharged per kg of cleaned cloth. Nevertheless, it is thought that micro and nano plastics are primarily created on building spots as a consequence of negligence or inappropriate storage. The building industry also produces a sizeable amount of micro and nano plastics from plastic polymers used in coating, insulating substances, and conduits. (Battulga et al. 2019). Additionally, they also mentioned in their study that MNPs are utilized in a special way like sandblasting as blasting agents to remove paint, clean, abrade, or refine surfaces (Fig. 6.2).

98

S. Jagatee et al. Fibre

Natural Fibre

Natural Vegetable

Natural Animal

Man made Fibre.

Natural Mineral Fibre

Regenerated manmade Fibre.

Synthetic manmade Fibre polyester

Seed Fibre (Cotton) Phloem Fibre (jute, linen, flax, ramie, kenaf) Leaf Fibre (banana, sisal, henequen, hemp)

Cellulose

Wool Asbestos Silk

Hair

Protein

Alginate

Other manmade Fibre

Metallic Fibre

Polyvinyl, Acrylic Glass Fibre Polyolefin

Other

Carbon Fibre

Fig. 6.2 Microfibre classification based upon their nature and origin

6.2.1 Natural Fibre Natural fiber is an organic textile that is an unprocessed substance that looks like strands and can be procured directly either from animal, plant, or mineral origin. These strands can be twisted into filaments to form intertwined textiles or untangled substances like wool or parchment. An organic textile can also be defined as a collection of cells with a narrow width compared to their height. Despite the abundance of fibrous substances in the natural world, especially cellulose-based ones such as flax, timber, cereals, and reeds, only a handful of them can be utilized for textile production or other industrial applications.

6.2.2 Man-Made Fibre Fiber that has been manufactured; its chemical makeup, structure, and qualities have all been drastically changed. Numerous consumer and commercial products, including clothing like shirts, scarves, and hosiery, home decors like carpeting and curtains, and industrial components like tire cable, flame-resistant linings, and drive belts, are created from spun and woven man-made fibers. Polymers are a class of chemical substances with long, chain-like molecules of enormous dimensions and molecular mass that are used to create synthetic fibers. Maximum polymers constitute synthetic fibers and are similar to or related to the substances used in the production of plastics, elastomers, adhesives, and coatings. In reality, a range of non-fiber

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

99

products, such as transparent plastic soda bottles and cellophane envelope windows, are produced from polymers which are nowadays widely used household materials. These materials are chosen as fibers due to their durability, robustness, heat resistivity, and mold, as well as their capability to retain a constrained shape.

6.3 Micro and Nano Plastic Occurrence and Its Impact 6.3.1 Aquatic Habitats According to Zhang et al. (2020), MNPs are ubiquitously polluting water, land, and aerial sphere. These compartments are linked by various source-pathway-sink networks, which might affect MNP flux and retention. PE, PP, PS, and PC are the most common plastics found in MNPs trash in water bodies which intermingle with microbes, inorganic and organic matter in water ecosystems (Sarma et al. 2022) where Sarma et al. 2022 added that urban wastewater could be the main route for MPs into the aquatic system. Similarly, Nguyen et al. 2022 indicated in their study that laundry wastewater mostly adds up microfibers (MFs) in the aquatic atmosphere and it can harm the marine environment through 5 probable paths, i.e., serving as transporters of additional pollutants, causing physical harm to aquatic species’ digestive systems, obstructing the digestive tract, releasing poisonous compounds, and harboring noxious and invasive plankton and bacteria. Moreover, multiple research studies have demonstrated that micro and nanoparticles (MNPs) possess the capacity to absorb a diverse range of unsafe substances. Consequently, it is widely recognized that MNPs are capable of transporting noxious chemicals within and among different ecosystems, while also attracting them in the surrounding environment. (Yuan et al. 2020). As a result of the MNPs’ potential consumption by a variety of marine species, the marine food web may eventually be affected, causing serious risks to both aquatic and land animals (Al-Thawadi 2020). Various researchers documented the concentration of micro and nanofibers in the aquatic system worldwide which is depicted in Table 6.1. In accordance d reports, MNPs prevent some yeast, bacteria, and algae from growing, which has an impact on their crucial fundamental functions in various situations. Additionally, it has been noted that MNPs impede the digestive tracts of zooplankton and marine benthic species like mussels and oysters, which frequently results in decreased appetite, malnutrition, and fatalities (Van Cauwenberghe et al. 2013). Macro and nano plastics can pose a concern to social well-being because they are consumed by a varied range of aquatic animals and can build up through the network of food chain (Sana et al. 2020). In order to ensure the security of marine foodstuffs, it has been recommended that specialized indicator microorganisms be selected as sentinel species to monitor the influence of micro and nanoplastics in different habitats. For instance, the shellfish (Mytilus galloprovincialis) is a globally acknowledged indicator species for monitoring ocean contamination (Al-Thawadi

100

S. Jagatee et al.

Table 6.1 Worldwide estimation of Micro and Nano fibre in Aquatic system Sl. no

Area of study

MNPs concentration

References

1

Winnipeg lake, Canada

0 to 0.2 particles/ m2

Anderson et al. (2017)

2

Sea surface area of Charleston Harbour

0 to 15 particles/l

Gray et al. (2018)

3

Sea surface area of Winyah Bay

5 to 90 particles/l

Gray et al. (2018)

particles/m2

4

Gullmar Fjord, Swedish West Coast 0 to 1

5

Baltic Sea and Gulf of Bothnia

0 to 4 particles/m2 Schonlau et al. (2020)

Karlsson et al. (2020)

6

Raw fresh water sources, Czech Republic

1500 to 3,600 particles/l

Amobonye et al. (2020, 2021)

7

Treated water (WTP), Czech Republic

330 to 630 particles/l

Amobonye et al. (2020, 2021)

8

Drinking water bottle, Germany

0 to 200 particles/l Amobonye et al. (2020, 2021)

9

Water-related habitats Tamil Nadu, India

0 to 180 particles/ Amobonye et al. (2020, m2 2021)

10

Subtropical gyre, North Atlantic

10 to 500 particles/m2

Amobonye et al. (2020, 2021)

11

Changjiang Estuary, China

20 to 300 particles/kg

Amobonye et al. (2020, 2021)

12

Rivers and tidal flats, Shanghai

50 to 2000 particles/kg

Amobonye et al. (2020, 2021)

13

Rivers and tidal flats, United States

100 to 300 particles/kg

Amobonye et al. (2020, 2021)

14

Artic Ocean

0 to 0.05 particles/ Yakushev et al. (2020, m2 2021)

2020), while the sandworm (A. marina), a strong deposit feeder at the foundation of the seabed food chain, is frequently employed in experiments to determine the toxicity of marine sediment (Besseling et al. 2017).

6.3.2 Terrestrial Habitats One of the most notable and enduring human-caused effects on the land environment has been the contamination caused by MNPs. Hence there is now plentiful proof that MNP pollution has both intended and unintended negative consequences on various land habitats (Yakushev et al. 2021). It is also evidenced that maximum wastes generated from plastic that pile up in water resources were created, utilized, and carelessly dumped on land in the beginning. Habitats on land are therefore seen as enormous MNP reservoirs, with the ability to offer a variety of exposure paths

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

101

to the biota in land ecosystems, possibly changing the geochemistry and leading to ecological noxiousness (Allouzi et al. 2021). The regular examination of land materials, particularly soil samples, for the existence of nanoparticles, has therefore garnered significant interest in various parts of the globe. The presence of MNPs in different concentrations in the terrestrial ecosystem is well explained by various researchers in Table 6.2. Accumulated MNPs react with other possibly dangerous substances along with organic pollutants, doubling their effectiveness and adversely altering the diverse land ecosystem (Chai et al. 2020), causing irreparable harm to soil systems. Particularly, it has been seen that MNPs that might last for hundreds of years intermingle with organic matter in the loam, changing the physiology of soil and contaminating underground water, hence lowering vegetation and general productivity (Wahl et al. 2021). MNPs also greatly hinder the development, breeding, longevity, and existence of soil creatures, particularly worms and roundworms, through a range of harmful processes, such as buildup in the body, mutations in DNA, harmful effects on genes, imbalances in gut bacteria, damage to tissues, disorders in metabolism, harm to the nervous system, excessive stress, and toxicity to reproduction (Wang et al. 2021a). This will have a negative effect on the ecological functions that these species do naturally, such as the decomposition of litter, the cycling of nutrients, and the flow of energy (Wang et al. 2020). MNPs may also operate as carriers of infections and carbon-based contaminants on terrestrial ecosystem, similar to how they have been described in aquatic ecosystems, as compared to their large surface area and ratio of their volume with respect to their water-repelling properties. (Atugoda et al. 2021). Additionally, MNPs that are connected to microorganisms pose a concern to the environment because they serve as a route for the transfer of nanoparticles from ground to vegetation and ultimately, to other organisms through the food web (Chai et al. 2020). Table 6.2 Worldwide estimation of Micro and Nano fibre in Terrestrial system Sl. no

Area of study

MNPs concentration

References

1

Agricultural soil samples, Germany

0 to 1.5 particles/kg

Piehl et al. (2018)

2

Floodplain soil, Switzerland 10 to 593 particles/kg of soil

Scheurer and Bigalke (2018)

3

Floodplain soil, Shanghai

0 to 300 particles/kg

Liu et al. (2019d)

4

Paddy soil, Shanghai

10 to 210 particles/kg

Liu et al. (2019d)

5

Yellow–brown soil, Shanghai

100 to 255 particles/kg

Liu et al. (2019d)

6

Farmland soil, Shanghai

10 to 40 particles/kg

Liu et al. (2019d)

7

Agricultural soil samples, China

80 to 3,500 particles/kg

Amobonye et al. (2021)

8

Vegetable farmland, Wuhan 300 to 12, 600 particles/kg

Amobonye et al. (2021)

102

S. Jagatee et al.

6.3.3 The Atmosphere As of late, MNPs have been discovered in the air of municipal, sub municipal, and rural areas, and a recent investigation has recognized the air as a crucial storage and origin of contamination. According to research done by Mbachu et al. (2020), airborne MNPs can disperse over great distances from their source areas and build up in a range of water and land habitats, posing a number of risks to the biosphere. The air is the least researched in terms of micro and nano plastic occurrence and geographical spread, even though the destiny of MNPs is determined by the interconnectedness of different ecological sections (González- Pleiter et al. 2021). By comparison to MPs found in various ecosystems, MPs in the atmosphere have the ability to be consistently and directly absorbed, which is extremely dangerous for human health. Consequently, it is essential to have a comprehensive comprehension of the concentration, origin, and hazards of micro as well as nano plastics in the surroundings (Chen et al. 2020). Additionally, MPs and nano plastics have been observed in the interrelated dynamic and thermodynamic mechanisms taking place among the atmosphere and other ecological interfaces. The extensive distribution of micro and nano plastics in the air is elaborated in Table 6.3. Therefore, considering the widespread distribution of MNPs’ pollution around the globe, their inquiry must evolve into a fundamental aspect of the customary examination on air quality in the forthcoming years. Additionally, micro, and nano plastics in the air can eventually enter various land organisms through respiration, most notably humans. On the other hand, epidemiological research has linked micro and nano particle air contamination to significant respirational and cardiac consequences (Zhang et al. 2020). As was already said, the dynamic cycle of micro and nano plastics in the air, on the basis of their interaction across the air, land, and water ecosystems, includes the atmospheric transportation of MNPs (Chen et al. 2020). Additionally, according to Zhang et al. (2019), air transport is viewed as a key channel in the source-sink interactions of plastic contamination in various habitats. Although riverine and coastal discharge have been linked to a substantial amount of malleable particle deposition in the sea (Meijer et al. 2021), the atmospheric dispersion may also have an impact on the route of micro and nano plastic movement from land ecosystems to the ocean and the other way round. The biogeochemical process of nanoparticles (MNPs) throughout air, water, and land ecosystems is illustrated in Fig. 6.3. Since MNPs are expected to become airborne and travel by wind deflation, it is thought that, like all atmospheric pollutants, their mechanistic transport occurs mostly through dispersion and deposition (González-Pleiter et al. 2021). Current investigations have demonstrated how MNPs are transported through the atmosphere over a variety of distances and habitats (Wright et al. 2020; Tripathy et al. 2022). According to Allen et al. (2019), air mass routes showed that MNPs were spread up to ninety-five km, with the settling happening even in comparably untouched areas. However, it has also been documented that MNPs have been transported more than 100 km (Enyoh et al. 2019). The findings of nanoparticles in snow in far-off places like the Arctic, the Swiss Alps, and in urban areas of Germany, so suggest that MNPs are transported spatially by

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

103

Table 6.3 Worldwide estimation of Micro and Nanofiber in Atmosphere Sl. no

Area of study

MNPs concentration

References

1

Surabaya City, Indonesia

135 to 175 particles/m3

Asrin and Dipareza (2019)

2

West Pacific Ocean,

0 to 1.4 particles/ Liu et al. m3 (2019c)

3

Shanghai, China

0 to 4.2 particles/ Liu et al. m3 (2019b)

4

Suspended dust, Iran

0.3 to 1.1 particles/m3

5

Dry-weight sediments of Forni Glacier, Italian Alps

50 to 100 MNPs/ Ambrosini kg et al. (2019)

6

Fresh falling snow, Canada Fresh falling snow, Austria

0 to 22,000 ng/l 0 to 24,000 ng/l

Materi´c et al. (2020) Wang et al. (2021b)

7

Arctic and European snow

0 to 154,000 particles/l,

Bergmann et al. (2019)

8

Dry dust from Tehran metropolis, Iran Outdoor dust from metropolitan cities, China

2933–20,167 particles/kg 215 to 120,000 mg/kg

Liu et al. (2019a)

Abbasi et al. (2019)

the atmosphere (Bergmann et al. 2019). According to Zhang et al. (2020), several variables can influence the atmospheric transportation of MNPs, including wind direction, particle size, rainfall, human activity, and population densities. Additionally, several investigations have shown a correlation between the direction of the wind and the amounts of airborne MNPs (Chen et al. 2020). For example, in Hamburg (Germany), a shift from western to southern wind was associated with an increase in MNP contamination (Klein and Fischer 2019). At downwind locations, higher airborne MP abundances were also observed (Chen et al. 2020). According to Enyoh et al. (2019), the features of MNPs, including their dimensions, figures, and lengths, play a significant role in how they are transported through the atmosphere. Tiny micro and nanoparticles (25 mm) were the most prevalent at the location studied, whereas larger micro cum nanoparticles were less frequently observed.

6.3.4 Human Health A ubiquitous presence of micro cum nano plastics in ecosystems as a result of the unrestricted manufacturing, usage, and inappropriate disposal of plastic products has exposed humans to MNPs through a variety of routes, including consumption

104

S. Jagatee et al.

Atmosphere dynamics

Atmosphere

Aquatic deposition

Aquatic ecosystem

Terrestrial deposition

Biovectors Resuspension

Soil run off & Soil erosion.

Excretion

Anthropogenic Source

Inhalation Ingestion

Settling Terrestrial

Resuspension

Bioaccumulation

Waste recycling

Excretion

Fig. 6.3 The biogeochemical cycle of MNPs across the air, water, and land ecosystem

(unhygienic food and drinks), breathing in (polluted air, air particles), and contact with the skin (personal care items and fabrics) (Kumar et al. 2023a, b). Furthermore, they highlighted that because of their responsiveness to biological systems, manipulated nanostructures (MNPs) present in hair and facial merchandise, sanitizers, moisturizing gel, medical devices, tire cleansers, and so on, are also recognized as a burgeoning origin of ENPs that have notable impacts on individuals.

6.4 Mitigating the Effects of Micro and Nano Plastics The harmful consequences of plastic remnants caused by the current extensive growth in plastic manufacture and consumption are being addressed from a variety of viewpoints. Because there are so many knowledge gaps, it is intrinsically difficult to assess MNPs’ environmental effects on a large scale. However, it has been predicted that plastic debris, consisting of macro-, meso-, Micro- and nanoplastics lead to a yearly worldwide economic deficit of approximately 13.5 billion US dollars (da Costa 2018). Valuable bioremediation technology

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

105

for removing MNPs and other pollutants from contaminated water has been implicated (Das and Swain 2013; Dey et al. 2023). It involves the use of living or non-living biomass, such as bacteria, fungi, algae, or other natural materials, to adsorb and bind pollutants from water onto their surfaces (Das et al. 2012; Mohanty et al. 2017). This process can effectively remove a wide range of contaminants, including dyes, heavy metals, and other organic and inorganic pollutants (Das and Mishra 2010; Das et al. 2011; Ghosh and Das 2015; Mohanty et al. 2017). These monetary ramifications have been highlighted as including clean-up and preventative expenses as well as costs attributable to the direct effects of this plastic debris on every individual. Therefore, it has been up to scientists, businesses, governments, and the general public to stop the ongoing buildup of MNPs in various contexts. MNPs are thought to have long-term negative impacts on all life forms, even though there is little to no evidence of their harmful effects on higher species, particularly humans. Hence, in this context, it is advisable to broaden biological studies to encompass the superior organisms within the numerous food webs rather than confining them to solitary or lower organisms. This is crucial since lesser organisms are thought to have significantly different clearance and xenobiotic resistance capacities compared to higher organisms (Das et al. 2014; Das and Singh 2011). For instance, it has been suggested that to assess the combined effects more accurately on behavioral alterations, growth, multiplication, subsistence, and noxiousness, the exposure of animals at both junior and advanced trophic levels should be there in the identical habitats containing MNPs (Shen et al. 2019). Additionally, there is an urge to investigate the noxiousness of MNPs by extrapolating results from the research laboratory to actual environmental circumstances using enhanced pollutant risk assessment approaches to forecast exposure to MNPs and the risk of pathophysiological effects that may result (Das et al. 2014; Das and Singh 2011). These would make it easier to establish effective concentrations and improve the precision of forecasting the environmental risks connected to MNPs in real-time (Anbumani and Kakkar 2018). Additionally, a system-oriented examination of the toxicological consequences of MNPs during real-life and controlled exposures would provide additional light on the remediation procedures needed and open the door to a more resilient ecosystem (Mishra and Das 2021; Bhattacharjee et al. 2022). To manage and reduce the hazards brought on by the buildup of MNPs in the environment, biotechnology is now being investigated through many creative ways. Producing bioplastics, which are more ecologically friendly and sustainable than plastics derived from crude oil, is one of the most practical strategies. These bioplastics are mostly made of inexhaustible carbon-based ingredients and can therefore be considerably destroyed by various bacteria with their reactants. Additionally, it has been determined that the extraordinary hydrophilic property of these bio-derived and compostable polymers is what primarily enables their decomposition and hydrolysis (Filiciotto and Rothenberg 2021). Moreover, as opposed to MNPs from other plastics, it has been shown in numerous studies that bacteria may efficiently use these biodegradable plastics as nutrition sources, breaking them down and transforming them into simple forms. Consequently, these “novel” plastics are believed to possess

106

S. Jagatee et al.

the capacity to entirely substitute the plastics derived from fossil fuels in the foreseeable future since they exhibit comparable characteristics and perform similar roles as their previous equivalents, while also being expected to impose less pressure on diverse ecosystems (Ogunola et al. 2018). The breakdown of synthetic plastic polymers, which today make up the majority of the plastic wastes troubling the ecosystem, is also the subject of numerous efforts. In this regard, it has been thoroughly covered in the former part of this document extensively discusses the active research into the potential contributions of different micro-organisms along with their enzymes, in the deterioration, fragmentation, absorption, and breakdown of these petroleum-derived polymers and their smaller constituents. Other mitigating methods focus on lowering the production of plastic garbage and keeping it from entering the various ecosystems as much as possible, in addition to the aforementioned scientific initiatives. One of these solutions entails efforts by many governments to eventually outlaw the use and sale of plastic bags in general as well as the industrial usage of MPs in cosmetics. In the more than 30 nations throughout the world that have enacted similar restrictions partially or entirely, it has been noted that they are beneficial in reducing the accumulation of plastic waste. For instance, the introduction of a charge on poly bags in Portugal was predicted to lead to a spectacular four hundred percent decrease in the quantity of plastic baggage used by each individual during a single excursion (Martinho et al. 2017). However, the majority of the initial enforcers of this restriction were from European nations, particularly Germany and Denmark, where it has been in effect for about thirty years (Xanthos and Walker 2017). Nevertheless, a few emerging countries, such as India and certain nations in Latin America recognized the need to limit plastic trash and have enacted various prohibitions and restrictions at various levels of government (Vimal et al. 2020). Furthermore, the southern region of Karnataka banned all disposable plastic items in 2016 and the capital city of India, Delhi, prohibited all non-reusable plastics in 2017 (Radha 2019). The effective prevention or reduction of plastic pollution has been proven to be made possible by eco-labeling (Anagnosti et al. 2021). The main goals of this strategy are to reduce the negative ecological effects of goods and raise consumer eco-friendly awareness, which will enhance the likelihood that they will make more ecologically friendly decisions. Compared to other issues like climate change and ocean acidification, a considerable majority of the community was unaware of micro and nano plastics and their consequences on the ecosystem, according to scientific research examining public attitudes regarding plastic pollution (Ogunola et al. 2018). Thus, it is anticipated that civic alertness campaigns and informative outreach initiatives by administrative and private (NGOs) groups will significantly encourage behavioural and perfective approaches that will ultimately result in decreased intensive usage and dumping of used plastics products. On the business front, it is thought that lessening the usage of microplastic in industrial stuff like cosmetics may lessen the impact of the fight against MNPs. In this sense, the universality and efficacy of this strategy will be improved by a mandated elimination of microplastic beads using legal prohibition initiated by management and their regulatory bodies (Anagnosti et al. 2021). Because so much plastic garbage is thrown out and ends up in landfills and natural ecosystems all over the world, reprocessing is also a justifiable way to lessen the probable harm

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

107

caused by micro and nano-plastics. The recycling rate for plastic garbage, however, differs dramatically across industrialized and developing nations, being much greater in the latter. This is mostly because the manufacture of recovered plastic is not viable in a cheaper way, attracting little investment. The market for recycled plastics will be fuelled by initiatives including levies on the use of unused plastics, public knowledge of recycled plastics’ ecological advantages, and government incentives for their manufacturing (Calero et al. 2021).

6.5 Conclusion From this chapter, this can be concluded that though microfibres are an emerging threat to our environment in the current situation these microfibres can be recycled and reused from variousss appliances to usable forms to keep our environment clean and safe. As these microfibres are accidentally being absorbed or eaten by various life forms of the lower trophic level, to keep safe these life forms as well as our ecosystem various alternative measures should be followed to extract these micro and nanofibers from the environment and be returned to the environment in nonhazardous from with a new face. The microfibres of cigarette butts which add up as garbage in the environment can be recycled and processed to produce certain home appliances like pillows or maybe dolls and soft toys. Likewise, way back textile waste was utilized in the field of geotechnical which focused on the specific type of fiber therefore currently generation is focusing on the use of multi-material fabric waste in blended mode which will surely minimize the enormous capital used in the sorting phase. Similarly, fibers from cotton waste have found notable applications in slope modification, soil reinforcement, and construction ingredients, and are also a confirmed source for cellulosic nanocrystals. In the same way, bio composite from the cellulosic waste fiber can be utilized for production of automobile appliances such as headliner and door panel, sitting material, dashboards etc. Likewise, in view of medical field waste nanofibers from cellulosic source can also be used for tissue engineering, regeneration of bone, grafting various components related to vascular system due to its elasticity, strength and maintained cell growth for a long period of time as well as biomarkers and treatment of bone disorders. Additionally, these waste fibres are also used for purification of heavy metals from wastewater, preparation of biodegradable pots and food packaging materials. Therefore, keeping in view of these applications of waste micro and nano fibres present generation can lead to a sustainable and cleaner world in the near future.

108

S. Jagatee et al.

References Abbasi S, Keshavarzi B, Moore F, Turner A, Kelly FJ, Dominguez AO, Jaafarzadeh N (2019) Distribution and potential health impacts of microplastics and microrubbers in air and street dusts from Asaluyeh County. Iran. Environ Pollut 244:153–164 Allen S, Allen D, Phoenix VR, Le Roux G, Jiménez PD, Simonneau A, Binet S, Galopet D (2019) Atmospheric transport and deposition of microplastics in a remote mountain catchment. Nat Geosci 12(5):339–344 Allouzi MMA, Tang DYY, Chew KW, Rinklebe J, Bolan N, Allouzi SMA, Show PL (2021) Micro (nano) plastic pollution: the ecological influence on soil-plant system and human health. Sci Total Environ 788:147815 Al-Thawadi S (2020) Microplastics and nanoplastics in aquatic environments: challenges and threats to aquatic organisms. Arab J Sci Eng 45:4419–4440 Alves TF, Morsink M, Batain F, Chaud MV, Almeida T, Fernandes DA, da Silva CF, Souto EB, Severino P (2020) Applications of natural, semi-synthetic, and synthetic polymers in cosmetic formulations. Cosmetics 7(75):1–16 Ambrosini R, Azzoni RS, Pittino F, Diolaiuti G, Franzetti A, Parolini M (2019) First evidence of microplastic contamination in the supraglacial debris of an alpine glacier. Environ Pollut 253:297–301 Amobonye A, Bhagwat P, Raveendran S, Singh S, Pillai S (2021) Environmental impacts of microplastic and nanoplastics: a current review. Front Microbiol 12:1–21 Amobonye A, Bhagwat P, Singh S, Pillai S (2020) Plastic biodegradation: frontline microbes and their enzymes. Sci Total Environ 759:1–59 An L, Liu Q, Deng Y, Wu W, Gao Y, Ling W (2020) Sources of Microplastic in the environment. Microplastics in terrestrial environments: Emerging contaminants and major challenges. eds. D. He, and Y. Luo. (Cham, Switzerland: Springer), 143–159 Anagnosti L, Varvaresou A, Pavlou P, Protopapa E, Carayanni V (2021) Worldwide actions against plastic pollution from microbeads and microplastics in cosmetics focusing on European policies. Has the issue been handled effectively? Mar Pollut Bull 162:1–15 Anbumani S, Kakkar P (2018) Ecotoxicological effects of microplastics on biota: a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:14373–14396 Asrin NRN, Dipareza A (2019) Microplastics in ambient air (case study: Urip Sumoharjo street and Mayjend Sungkono street of Surabaya City, Indonesia). IAETSD–J. Adv. Res. Appl. Sci. 6:54–57 Athey SN, Erdleb LM (2022) Are we underestimating anthropogenic microfiber pollution? A critical review of occurrence, methods, and reporting. Environ Toxicol Chem 41(4):822–837 Atugoda T, Vithanage M, Wijesekara H, Bolan N, Sarmah AK, Bank MS, You S, Ok YS (2021) Interactions between microplastics, pharmaceuticals and personal care products: implications for vector transport. Environ Int 149:1–21 Battulga B, Kawahigashi M, Oyuntsetseg B (2019) Distribution and composition of plastic debris along the river shore in the Selenga River basin in Mongolia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:14059– 14072 Bergmann M, Mützel S, Primpke S, Tekman MB, Trachsel J, Gerdts G (2019) White and wonderful? Microplastics prevail in snow from the Alps to the Arctic. Sci Adv 5(8):1–10 Besseling E, Foekema EM, Van Den Heuvel-Greve MJ, Koelmans AA (2017) The effect of microplastic on the uptake of chemicals by the lugworm Arenicola marina (L.) under environmentally relevant exposure conditions. Environ Sci Technol 51:8795–8804 Bhattacharjee J, Mishra S, Das AP (2022) Recent advances in sensor-based detection of toxic dyes for bioremediation application: a review. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 194:4745–4764. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12010-021-03767-7 Brzuska K, Graaf JED, Kaumanns J, Meyberg M, Schlatter H (2015) Use of micro-plastic beads in cosmetic products in Europe and their estimated emissions to the North Sea environment. SOFW. J. 141:40–46

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

109

Calero M, Godoy V, Quesada L, Martín-Lara MÁ (2021) Green strategies for microplastics reduction. Curr Opin Gr Sustain Chem 28:1–6 Chai B, Wei Q, She Y, Lu G, Dang Z, Yin H (2020) Soil microplastic pollution in an e-waste dismantling zone of China. Waste Manag 118:291–301 Chen G, Feng Q, Wang J (2020) Mini-review of microplastics in the atmosphere and their risks to humans. Sci Total Environ 703:1–10 Chen X, Xiong X, Jiang X, Shi H, Wu C (2019) Sinking of floating plastic debris caused by biofilm development in a freshwater lake. Chemosphere 222:856–864 Da Costa JP (2018) Micro-and nanoplastics in the environment: research and policymaking. Curr Opin Environ Sci Health 1:12–16 Das AP, Mishra S (2010) Biodegradation of the metallic carcinogen hexavalent chromium Cr(VI) by an indigenously isolated bacterial strain. J Carcinog 9:6. https://doi.org/10.4103/1477-3163. 63584 Das AP, Singh S (2011) Occupational health assessment of chromite toxicity among Indian miners. Indian J Occup Environ Med 15(1):6–13. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5278.82998 Das AP, Swain S (2013) Algal biosorption of toxic dye methylene blue. In: A potential source of food, feed, biochemicals, biofuels and biofertilizers, international conference on algal biorefinery, Indian Institute of Technology (Vol 13) Das AP, Kumar PS, Swain S (2014) Recent advances in biosensor-based endotoxin detection. Biosensors Bioelectron 51:62–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2013.07.020 Das AP, Sukla LB, Pradhan N (2012) Microbial recovery of manganese using “Staphylococcus Epidermidis”. Int J Nonferrous sMetallurgy 1(2), 4, Article 21393. https://doi.org/10.4236/ijnm. 2012.12002 Das AP, Sukla LB, Pradhan N, Nayak S (2011) Manganese biomining: a review. Bioresource Technol 102(16):7381–7387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.05.018 De Falco F, Di Pace E, Cocca M, Avella M (2019) The contribution of washing processes of synthetic clothes to microplastic pollution. Sci Rep 9:1–11 Dey S, Tripathy B, Kumar MS, Das AP (2023) Ecotoxicological consequences of manganese mining pollutants and their biological remediation. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol Ding N, An D, Yin X, Sun Y (2020) Detection and evaluation of microbeads and other microplastics in wastewater treatment plant samples. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:15878–15887 Duncan EM, Arrowsmith J, Bain C, Broderick AC, Lee J, Metcalfe K, Pikesley SK, Snape RTE, Sebille EV, Godley BJ (2018) The true depth of the Mediterranean plastic problem: extreme microplastic pollution on marine turtle nesting beaches in Cyprus. Mar Pollut Bull 136:334–340 Enyoh CE, Verla AW, Verla EN, Ibe FC, Amaobi CE (2019) Airborne microplastics: a review study on method for analysis, occurrence, movement, and risks. Environ Monit Assess 191:1–17 Geyer R (2020) Production, use, and fate of synthetic polymers. Plastic Waste and Recycling, 13–32 Ghosh S, Das AP (2015) Modified titanium oxide (TiO2) nanocomposites and its array of applications: a review. Toxicol Environ Chem 97(5):491–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02772248.2015. 1052204 González-Pleiter M, Edo C, Aguilera Á, Viúdez-Moreiras D, Pulido-Reyes G, González-Toril E, Osuna S, Diego-Castilla G, Leganes F, Fernandez-Pinas F, Rosal R (2021) Occurrence and transport of microplastics sampled within and above the planetary boundary layer. Sci Total Environ, 761 Gray AD, Wertz H, Leads RR, Weinstein JE (2018) Microplastic in two South Carolina estuaries: occurrence, distribution, and composition. Mar Pollut Bull 128:223–233 Karbalaei S, Hanachi P, Walker TR, Cole M (2018) Occurrence, sources, human health impacts and mitigation of microplastic pollution. Environ Sci Pol 25:36046–36063 Klein M, Fischer EK (2019) Microplastic abundance in atmospheric deposition within the metropolitan area of Hamburg. Germany. Sci Total Environ 685:96–103 Kumar PV, Singh E, Singh S, Pandey A, Bhargava PC (2023) Micro- and nano-plastics (MNPs) as emerging pollutant in ground water: Environmental impact, potential risks, limitations, and way forward towards sustainable management. Chem Eng, 459

110

S. Jagatee et al.

Lamichhane G, Acharya A, Marahatha R, Modi B, Paudel R, Adhikari A, Raut BK, Aryal S, Parajuli N (2022) Microplastics in environment: global concern, challenges, and controlling measures. Int J Environ Sci Technol 20:4673–4694 Liu C, Li J, Zhang Y, Wang L, Deng J, Gao Y, Yu L, Zhang J, Sun H (2019a) Widespread distribution of PET and PC microplastics in dust in urban China and their estimated human exposure. Environ Int 128:116–124 Liu K, Wang X, Fang T, Xu P, Zhu L, Li D (2019b) Source and potential risk assessment of suspended atmospheric microplastics in Shanghai. Sci Total Environ 675:462–471 Liu K, Wu T, Wang X, Song Z, Zong C, Wei N, Li D (2019c) Consistent transport of terrestrial microplastics to the ocean through atmosphere. Environ Sci Technol 53:10612–10619 Liu M, Song Y, Lu S, Qiu R, Hu J, Li X, Bigalke M, Shi H, He D (2019d) A method for extracting soil microplastics through circulation of sodium bromide solutions. Sci Total Environ 691:341–347 Lochhead R (2017) The use of polymers in cosmetic products. in Cosmetic Science and Technology. eds. Sakamoto K, Lochhead RY, Yamashita Y (Oxford, UK: Elsevier), 171–221 Ma B, Xue W, Ding Y, Hu C, Liu H, Qu J (2019) Removal characteristics of microplastics by Fe-based coagulants during drinking water treatment. J Environ Sci 78:267–275 Martinho G, Balaia N, Pires A (2017) The Portuguese plastic carrier bag tax: the effects on consumers’ behavior. Waste Manag 61:3–12 Materi´c DA, Kasper-Giebl A, Kau D, Anten M, Greilinger M, Ludewig E, Sebille EV, Rockmann T, Holzinger R (2020) Micro-and nanoplastics in Alpine snow: a new method for chemical identification and (semi) quantification in the nanogram range. Environ Sci Technol 54:2353– 2359 Mbachu O, Jenkins G, Pratt C, Kaparaju P (2020) A new contaminant superhighway? A review of sources, measurement techniques and fate of atmospheric microplastics. Water Air Soil Pollut 231:1–27 Meijer LJ, Van Emmerik T, Van Der Ent R, Schmidt C, Lebreton L (2021) More than 1000 rivers account for 80% of global riverine plastic emissions into the ocean. Sci Adv 7(18):1–12 Mishra S, Das AP (2021) Chapter 11—Current treatment technologies for removal of microplastic and microfiber pollutants from wastewater. In: Shah MP, Sarkar A, Mandal S (Eds), Wastewater treatment (pp 237–251). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821881-5.00011-8 Mishra S, Das AP (2022) Treatment of the wastewater polluted with synthetic microfiber released from washing machine. In: Das BB, Hettiarachchi H, Sahu PK, Nanda S (Eds), Recent developments in sustainable infrastructure (ICRDSI-2020)—GEO-TRA-ENV-WRM: Conference Proceedings from ICRDSI-2020 Vol 2 (pp 109–117). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-981-16-7509-6_9 Mishra S, Das AP (2023) Microbial remediation of synthetic microfiber contaminated wastewater. In: Shah MP (Ed), Microbial technologies in industrial wastewater treatment (pp 337–350). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2435-6_17 Mishra S, Dash D, Das AP (2022) Detection, characterization and possible biofragmentation of synthetic microfibers released from domestic laundering wastewater as an emerging source of marine pollution. Marine Pollut Bulletin 185:114254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022. 114254 Mishra S, Dash D, Das AP (2023) Aquatic microbial diversity on plastisphere: colonization and potential role in microplastic biodegradation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–12.https://doi.org/10.1080/ 01490451.2023.2209750 Mishra S, Dash D, Al-Tawaha ARMS, Das AP (2022b) A review on heavy metal ion adsorption on synthetic microfiber surface in aquatic environments. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 194(10):4639– 4654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-022-04029-w Mishra S, Rath CC, Das AP (2019) Marine microfiber pollution: a review on present status and future challenges. Marine Pollut Bullet 140:188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019. 01.039

6 Synthetic Microfiber: An Enduring Environmental Problem Linked …

111

Mishra S, Rout PK, Das AP (2021) Emerging microfiber pollution and its remediation. In: Prasad R (Ed), Environmental pollution and remediation (pp 247–266). Springer Singapore. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-15-5499-5_9 Mishra S, Singh RP, Rath CC, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: source, transport and their remediation. J Water Process Eng 38:101612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101612 Mishra S, Swain S, Sahoo M, Mishra S, Das AP (2022c) Microbial colonization and degradation of microplastics in aquatic ecosystem: a review. Geomicrobiol J 39(3–5):259–269. https://doi. org/10.1080/01490451.2021.1983670 Mohanty S, Ghosh S, Nayak S, Das AP (2017) Bioleaching of manganese by Aspergillus sp. isolated from mining deposits. Chemosphere 172:302–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemos phere.2016.12.136 Mohit K, Pandit S, Patel V, Khanna N, Nag M, Lahiri D, Ray RR, Das AP, Das D (2023) Maximization of energy recovery from starch processing wastewater by thermophilic dark fermentation coupled with microbial fuel cell technology. Geomicrobiology J,https://doi.org/10.1080/014 90451.2023.2209555 Nguyen N, Nguyen PT, Duong HC, Bui XT, Hoang NB, Nghiem LD (2022) Microfibers in laundry wastewater: problem and solution. Sci Total Environ, 852 Nirmala K, Rangasamy G, Ramya M, Uma Shankar V, Rajesh G (2023) A critical review on recent research progress on microplastic pollutants in drinking water. Environ Res 222:1–8 Ogunola OS, Onada OA, Falaye AE (2018) Mitigation measures to avert the impacts of plastics and microplastics in the marine environment (a review). Environ Sci Pol 25:9293–9310 Padervand M, Lichtfouse E, Robert D, Wang C (2020) Removal of microplastics from the environment. A Rev Environ Chem Lett 18:807–828 Paul A, Dey S, Ram DK, Das AP (2023) Hexavalent Chromium Pollution and its Sustainable Management through Bioremediation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/014 90451.2023.2218377 Pradhan G, Tripathy B, Ram DK, Digal AK, Das AP (2023) Bauxite Mining Waste Pollution and Its Sustainable Management through Bioremediation. Geomicrobiology J, 1–10.https://doi.org/ 10.1080/01490451.2023.2235353 Prüst M, Meijer J, Westerink RHS (2020) The plastic brain: neurotoxicity of micro and nano plastics. Part Fibre Toxicol 17(24):1–16 Radha R (2019) Plastic pollution and plastic ban: will Tamil Nadu stand a chance?. In: NEW INDIA, 2019, Proceeding of the clean india for new india conference; 2019 Jan 24, New Delhi, India. ed. C. Ambica (New Delhi: MJP Publishers). 221:221–226, 226 Santillo D, Miller KA, Jhonston P (2017) Microplastics as contaminants in commercially important seafood species: microplastics in Seafood. Integrated Environ Assess Manage 13(3):516–521 Sarma H, Hazarika RP, Kumar V, Roy A, Pandit S, Prasad R (2022) Microplastics in marine and aquatic habitats: sources, impact, and sustainable remediation approaches. Environ Sustain 5:39–49 Shen M, Zhang Y, Zhu Y, Song B, Zeng G, Hu D, Wen X, Ren X (2019) Recent advances in toxicological research of nano plastics in the environment: a review. Environ Pollut 252:511–521 Singh P, Sharma VP (2016) Integrated plastic waste management: environmental and improved health approaches. Procedia Environ Sci 35:692–700 Singh RP, Mishra S, Das AP (2020) Synthetic microfibers: pollution toxicity and remediation. Chemosphere 257:127199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127199 Smyth K, Drake J, Li Y, Rochman C, Van Seters T, Passeport E (2021) Bioretention cells remove microplastics from urban stormwater. Water Res 191:1–10 Triebskorn R, Braunbeck T, Grummt T, Hanslik L (2019) Relevance of nano- and microplastics for freshwater ecosystems: a critical review. Trends Analyt Chem 110(15) Tripathy B, Dash A, Das AP (2022) Detection of environmental microfiber pollutants through vibrational spectroscopic techniques: recent advances of environmental monitoring and future prospects. Critical Rev Analyt Chem, 1–11.https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347.2022.2144994

112

S. Jagatee et al.

Van Cauwenberghe L, Vanreusel A, Mees J, Janssen CR (2013) Microplastic pollution in deep-sea sediments. Environ Pollut 182:495–499 Vimal K, Mathiyazhagan K, Agarwal V, Luthra S, Sivakumar K (2020) Analysis of barriers that impede the elimination of single-use plastic in developing economy context. J Clean Prod 272:1–12 Wahl A, Le Juge C, Davranche M, El Hadri H, Grassl B, Reynaud S, Gigault J (2021) Nanoplastic occurrence in a soil amended with plastic debris. Chemosphere 262:1–12 Wang Q, Adams CA, Wang F, Sun Y, Zhang S (2021a). Interactions between microplastics and soil fauna: a critical review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol, 1–33 Wang W, Ge J, Yu X, Li H (2020) Environmental fate and impacts of microplastics in soil ecosystems: progress and perspective. Sci Total Environ 708:1–12 Wang Z, Saadé NK, Ariya PA (2021b) Advances in ultra-trace analytical capability for micro/ Nanoplastics and water-soluble polymers in the environment: fresh falling urban snow. Environ Pollut 276:1–15 Waring RH, Harris RM, Mitchell SC (2018) Plastic contamination of the food chain: a threat to human health? Maturitas 115:64–68 Wright S, Ulke J, Font A, Chan K, Kelly F (2020) Atmospheric microplastic deposition in an urban environment and an evaluation of transport. Environ Int 136:1–12 Xanthos D, Walker TR (2017) International policies to reduce plastic marine pollution from singleuse plastics (plastic bags and microbeads): a review. Mar Pollut Bull 118:17–26 Yakushev E, Gebruk A, Osadchiev A, Pakhomova S, Lusher A, Berezina A, Bavel BV, Vorozheikina E, Chernykh D, Kolbasova G, Razgon I, Semiletov I (2021) Microplastics distribution in the Eurasian Arctic is affected by Atlantic waters and Siberian rivers. Commun Earth Environ 2:1–10 Yuan J, Ma J, Sun Y, Zhou T, Zhao Y, Yu F (2020) Microbial degradation and other environmental aspects of microplastics/plastics. Sci Total Environ 715:1–15 Zhang Y, Gao T, Kang S, Sillanpää M (2019) Importance of atmospheric transport for microplastics deposited in remote areas. Environ Pollut 254:1–10 Zhang Y, Kang S, Allen S, Allen D, Gao T, Sillanpää M (2020) Atmospheric microplastics: a review on current status and perspectives. Earth-Sci Rev 203:1–12

Chapter 7

Environmental Occurrence and Contemporary Health Issues of Micro Plastics Aditya Kishore Dash, Abanti Pradhan, and Lala Behari Sukla

Abstract The micro and nanoplastic have wider range of applications in the daily consumable products such as brushing, clothing and beauty product as cleanser, scrubber and shower gel etc. The pervasive occurrence of microplastics at different component of environment such as freshwater, drinking water, marine water, food, agroecosystems, biota, atmosphere, and also in other remote locations is well known. Now a day’s microplastic particles have occurred in a variety of ranges such as shape, size and chemical composition in nature. The health implications are directly related to the complex nature of MPs entering to the human system through different routes. Upon entering it is translocated to different parts of the body system through transformation and weathering process in the biological pathway. The uptake efficiency of PMs through gastrointestinal, alveolar, and dermal epithelium tissue can be determined through its size and nature. The MPs having size of 5–10 µm accumulated in animal tissue such as rat, pig and dogs. In human gastrointestinal tract 90% of MPs bigger than 150 µm size excreted through the stool and the smaller size 0.1–10 µm MPs can cross the blood—brain barrier and placenta and enter to the systematic circulatory system through endocytosis. Traces of MPs also found in human lungs, kidney, liver and brain which are responsible for cellular damage and disturb the human immune system. MPs of size 15–20 µm are very much toxic and can enter into circulatory and lymphatic system in human body. MPs can induce cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and inflammatory response, in human lung tissue, and long-term MP exposure leads to lung diseases including asthma and pneumoconiosis and many more health implications need to be studied. This article is an effort to give an insight on MP pollution and related human health implications. The review focuses on identification of the gap areas in current knowledge and also highlights way forward for future research. A. K. Dash (B) · A. Pradhan Department of Chemistry, ITER, Siksha ‘O’ Anusandhan Deemed to be University, 751030, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India e-mail: [email protected] L. B. Sukla Biofuel and Bioprocessing Research Centre, ITER, SOA University, Bhubaneswar, India © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024 A. P. Das et al. (eds.), Renewable Energy Generation and Value Addition from Environmental Microfiber Pollution Through Advanced Greener Solution, Environmental Science and Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51792-1_7

113

114

A. K. Dash et al.

Keywords Micro plastics · Environmental pollution · Human health · Cytotoxicity · Genotoxicity

7.1 Introduction Microplastics (MPs) of different shape, size, texture and composition with size