Author Carolyn states that even though ocean-borne plastic has a reputation for recycling as an indestructible , some plastics actually decompose rapidly in the ocean(Carolyn,2009) which simply means that ocean-born plastic pollution could not be cleaned and recycled completely. In addition, ocean as a 'plastic soup' has lots of negative effects on wildlife and human beings.
There are four main points in the article. Firstly, plastics should now be considered as a new source of chemical pollution in the ocean. Secondly, Scientists found that toxic compounds …show more content…
Furthermore, scientists argues that toxic compounds do not occur naturally and the culprit is plastic , In addition, many chemical factors has been found out from the sample water such as styrene trimer and bisphenol A which would interfere with the reproductive systems of animals. Moreover, the study has shown that about 44 percent of all seabirds eat plastic, apparently by mistake, sometimes with fatal effects and 267 marine species are affected by plastic garbage animals are known to swallow plastic bags , which resemble jellyfish in mid-ocean(journal Environmental Research by oceanographer and chemist Charles,2008). Beside that, wild animals also face the invisible threat of toxic , plastic -derived chemicals. one example is Styrofoam, once it breaks down , the tiny polystyrene components start to sink as they are heavier than water, it is likely that this styrene pollutant is prevalent throughout the water and not just at the surface(David Barnes,N). Finally, Moore states that plastic pollution in the ocean would cause cancer to human beings as plastic-derived chemicals' potential damage to wildlife, the chemicals will be in touch with human and potentially cause cancer in humans. Moreover, Moore also claims that pollutants become more concentrated as animals eat other contaminated animals and humans are on the top of the chain