[Coral-List] Hawaii bans sunscreens deemed harmful to coral reefs

carib carib at usf.edu
Sat May 12 11:15:04 EDT 2018


Hello,
Has anyone examined these issues of chemical impact with respect to the potent biocides and other fuel treatments we add to diesel tanks and other fuels? These are needed to inhibit algae and bacterial growth in fuel tanks, which can be a serious problem for any boater.
 A few cc's with every fill keep a tank clean, and yet these very effective chemicals go into the water with the exaust fumes. Boat after boat, trip after trip, day after day and for decades now.
 We could estimate how many gallons of biocides go into reef areas every year as boat traffic has grown. Or has someone done this and evaluate toxicity?
Impact relative to sunscreens, beyond the reach of swimmers...?
Frank


------ * ------
Please excuse my brevity and spelling errors. Sent from my mobile device.
------------------------------------------------------------------------Frank Muller-Karger University of South Florida-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- Original message --------From: Emilie Johnsen <emiliejohnsen2 at gmail.com> Date: 5/12/18  9:28 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: Liz Wood <ewood at f2s.com> Cc: coral list <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Hawaii bans sunscreens deemed harmful to coral
 	reefs 
Liz,

Thank you so much for providing that new report! I am a recent graduate of
Nova Southeastern University's Oceanographic Center (Dania Beach, FL).
Coincidental to the recent news, my capstone investigated the toxicological
effects of commercial sunscreens on corals and other reef organisms in
addition to a pilot study involving Coral Restoration Foundation's
sunscreen exposure to* A. cervicornis*. There is a lot of information
regarding sunscreen toxicity that the public (science community, even) does
not know. I wish articles and social media posts would be more accurate...
Anyway, below is the summary of my investigation (with the guidance of Dr.
Esther Peters and Dr. Joshua Feingold) to add to that report:

Based on the review of 40 studies involving the exposure of commercial
sunscreens to various marine organisms:

   -  Chemical UV filters can be toxic, but it depends on many factors :
species, individual health, environmental factors, and the UV filter being
tested, among others (based on 13/40 studies). Additionally, toxicity
depends on how much of the chemical is being exposed, how much is absorbed
by the organism, and the organism's ability to expel and/or detoxify the
toxicant. Whether or not there are any physicochemical reactions between
chemical UV filters and seawater is poorly studied. Currently, their
toxicity is only considered dose-dependent with influences from
environmental conditions.

   -  Mineral UV filters are also considered toxic, but the reasoning is
more complex. Based on 28/40 studies, mineral ZnO and TiO2 nanoparticle
toxicity is not only dose-dependent like chemical UV filters, but their
physicochemical effects in seawater also make them a threat to various
marine life. These physicochemical reactions include dissociation of
mineral oxides into free-metal ions, photoreactivity, and aggregation into
sediments. In some cases, free Zn2+ and Ti2+ was considered more toxic,
especially for marine phytoplankton. (Free metal ions can actually inhibit
manganese uptake which is vital for phytoplankton growth!) Interestingly,
in addition to the influence of environmental factors on mineral UV filter
toxicity, particle size was also a huge factor. This is why many
"reef-safe" brands will advertise the use of "non-nano" mineral UV filters.
Metal oxide nanoparticles have toxic capabilities, but a couple studies
indicate that non-nanoparticles ( > 100 nm) can actually be more toxic to
certain filter feeders due to higher uptake concentration (D'Agata *et al*.,
2014), while some crustaceans and fish struggle with bioavailability (Wong*
et al*., 2010). Despite this, it does appear that--compared to chemical UV
filters and mineral nanoparticles-- non-nano mineral UV filters are most
promising to best reduce (albeit not completely eliminate) toxicity to
marine organisms.

Furthermore, there are no current regulations that enforce the integrity of
sunscreen advertisement claims. Many brands will claim themselves as
"eco-friendly", but there is nothing but their word to actually back it up.
(See the brand "Reef-Safe" as a perfect example.) I therefore applaud
Hawaii in their efforts to ban certain sunscreen chemicals, however it is
just the tip of the iceberg. Our oceans face a plethora of issues under the
name of climate change, but we all must remember...chemical pollution is
one of the hierarchal problems here, and it is disguised in many forms.

Best,

Emilie Johnsen

Master's Recipient, 2018
Nova Southeastern University's Halmos College of Natural Sciences and
Oceanography



On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Liz Wood <ewood at f2s.com> wrote:

> Dear listers,
>
> To add to the on-going debate about sunscreens I would like to draw your
> attention to a briefing on this issue posted on the International Coral
> Reef
> Initiative website in February 2018, prior to the implementation of the
> ban
> in Hawaii.
>
> https://www.icriforum.org/sites/default/files/ICRI_Sunscreen.pdf
>
> Best regards,
>
> Liz Wood
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Fenner
> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 1:28 PM
> To: coral list
> Subject: [Coral-List] Hawaii bans sunscreens deemed harmful to coral reefs
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/hawaii-bans-sunscreens-deemed-
> harmful-054453351.html
>
> Open-access.
>
> Hawaii approves bill banning sunscreen believed to kill coral reefs.
>
> https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/02/
> 607765760/hawaii-approves-bill-banning-sunscreen-
> believed-to-kill-coral-reefs
>
> Open-access.
>
> No, your sunscreen isn't killing the world's coral reefs.
>
> https://mashable.com/2015/11/10/sunscreen-killing-coral-
> reefs/?utm_campaign=Mash-BD-Synd-Yahoo-Science-Full&utm_
> cid=Mash-BD-Synd-Yahoo-Science-Full#45AuyLkru5qH
>
> Open-access.
>
> Cheers, Doug
>
> --
> Douglas Fenner
> Contractor for NOAA NMFS Protected Species, and consultant
> PO Box 7390
> Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799  USA
>
> New online open-access field guide to 300 coral species in Chagos, Indian
> Ocean
> http://chagosinformationportal.org/corals
>
> Even without El Nino, 2017 temperatures soared.
>
> http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/01/even-without-el-
> ni-o-2017-temperatures-still-soared?utm_campaign=news_
> weekly_2018-01-19&et_rid=17045989&et_cid=1800664
>
> Coral reefs are bleaching too frequently to recover
> https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/01/the-
> global-scourge-on-coral-reefs/549713/?utm_source=atlfb
>
> How to save the "tropical rainforests" of the ocean
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theworldpost/wp/2018/
> 01/09/coral-reefs/?tid=ss_tw-bottom&utm_term=.80ce291c546b
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list


More information about the Coral-List mailing list