Microplastics are also on the radar of Democratic lawmakers in Lansing, who\u2019ve proposed a package of bills that aim to reduce the overall use of some microplastics and better understand their occurrence in Michigan drinking systems and surface waters.<\/p>\n
The legislation, which the Senate Natural Resources committee heard testimony on Tuesday, Sept. 9, would build upon EGLE\u2019s nascent sampling effort.<\/p>\n
One of the bills, SB 505<\/a>, would create a Part 151 under the state Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. It would direct EGLE to develop a strategic statewide research and monitoring plan, establish baseline concentrations in the Great Lakes and contract with academic researchers to assess microplastic occurrence and impacts.<\/p>\n Another bill, SB 504<\/a>, would establish baseline concentrations in public water supplies and require quarterly monitoring and testing, with a detailed report due in 2031 that includes a recommended toxicity limit and preliminary risk assessment for public water supplies.<\/p>\n A third bill, SB 503<\/a>, would ban products made with microbeads, a type of tiny plastic added to cosmetic products. The prohibition would close a gap on similar, but more limited existing federal ban on microbeads that only applies to rinse-off products.<\/p>\n \u201cPlastics are not inert and scientists know that they can cause cancer and affect our hormones,\u201d said Democratic Sen. Sue Shink, the committee chair. \u201cBy creating a research and monitoring plan, Michigan can effectively respond to this pollutant.\u201d<\/p>\n Democratic Sen. Jeff Irwin of Ann Arbor, a bill sponsor, said the goal is to \u201cget our arms around this problem.\u201d <\/p>\n \u201cI didn\u2019t know about \u2018nurdles\u2019 until I started working in this legislation,\u201d Irwin said, suggesting fellow lawmakers look up the word for industrial pre-production pellets that can be found in surprisingly high quantity on Great Lakes beaches<\/a>.<\/p>\n Republicans on the committee asked questions about potential enforcement and how the legislation might impact agriculture but did not voice opposition. The bills do not currently have any bipartisan sponsors. The legislation drew support from environmental advocacy groups, but opposition in its current state from the chemical industry. <\/p>\n Marcus Branstad of the American Chemistry Council took issue with provisions that limit research partners to academic institutions, called the definition of microplastics \u201coverly broad\u201d and characterized timelines for implementation as too ambitious.<\/p>\n \u201cRequiring a safe limit for microplastics by 2031 is premature,\u201d he said. \u201cStandards should be tied to evidence of adverse health effects, not just picking a date six years down the road. Lessons from California show the complexities and costs of statewide monitoring.\u201d <\/p>\n Donna Kashian, an environmental science professor at Wayne State University who leads the International Association of Great Lakes Research and serves on the International Joint Commission (IJC)\u2019s Great Lakes Science Advisory Board, said new research is coming out monthly on the negative health effects of microplastics on humans and animals.<\/p>\n In November, the IJC released a report<\/a> that found microplastics to be \u201cubiquitous\u201d across water, sediment, biota and beaches<\/a> in the Great Lakes basin. The report noted evidence of microplastic in Great Lakes drinking water sources and fish<\/a> and found that some ambient water samples show concentrations that exceed existing risk thresholds.<\/p>\n More<\/b>: Plastic pollution is worsening in the Great Lakes<\/a><\/p>\n The report urged harmonization of research and monitoring methods across governments and suggested designating microplastics as a chemical of mutual concern by the U.S. and Canadian governments.<\/p>\n In lakes and rivers, microplastics pose a risk to humans who eat fish because, \u201cplastics act like little carbon particles and they will attach to other contaminants like metals, PCBs and PFAS,\u201d Kashian said. \u201cWhen an organism goes to eat them, they\u2019re getting a more clustered amount of these chemicals \u2014 a concentrated amount that they\u2019re ingesting.\u201d<\/p>\n Elin Warn Betanzo, a former federal drinking water engineer and private consultant<\/a> who played a pivotal role in helping expose the Flint water crisis, urged lawmakers to require water sampling at customer taps, not just at the water treatment plant.<\/p>\n \u201cTap water monitoring is essential \u2014 especially in communities with plastic water mains, plastic service lines and plastic plumbing,\u201d she said. \u201cSources of microplastics in our drinking water after the water leaves the treatment plant may include polyethylene PVC, HDPE and PEX pipes that are becoming more and more popular.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to know not only what is in our source water and what passes through our water treatment plants, but also what contaminants may increase once water travels through plastic pipes to residence taps,\u201d Betanzo said.<\/p>\n In the meantime, EGLE\u2019s sampling effort is collecting a second round of water samples this month and will grab a third in November.<\/p>\n The agency folded microplastics to an existing water chemistry monitoring program that grabs water samples from 50 randomly selected sites three times a year and analyses them for a variety of contaminants, including pesticides and PFAS.<\/p>\n Kostelnik said EGLE is already working across divisions and programs to develop a more holistic strategy around microplastics. The agency is looking at procedures developed in California, as well as strategies developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).<\/p>\n \u201cBut there\u2019s not a ton of information out there at this point,\u201d he said. \u201cThere is going to be a good amount of building of what\u2019s best for Michigan and the waters of the state.\u201d<\/p>\n If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement<\/a> and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and\/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"LANSING, MI \u2014 The state of Michigan began testing a random assortment of rivers and streams for microplastics…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":226339,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[2906,122413,746,122412,214,22109,85560,159,122411,67,132,68],"class_list":{"0":"post-226338","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-environment","8":"tag-agriculture","9":"tag-barry-county","10":"tag-environment","11":"tag-environmental-testing","12":"tag-michigan","13":"tag-nutrients","14":"tag-pesticides","15":"tag-science","16":"tag-surface-water","17":"tag-united-states","18":"tag-unitedstates","19":"tag-us"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115203102726013104","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226338","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=226338"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226338\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/226339"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=226338"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=226338"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=226338"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"Michigan](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/CQZ4QRVVEZDGZN63G6YO7FBZTU.jpeg\")
Megan Nakoneczny, a field researcher with Great Lakes Environmental Center (GLEC) takes water chemistry samples near Nashville, Mich., July 9, 2025. The stream was being tested for a variety of contaminates through the Michigan EGLE water chemistry monitoring program.Garret Ellison<\/p>\n