Researchers Say It’s Time To Ban Cigarette Filters For Good

• Thomas Nelson
• September 16, 2023
• Nature, News, Sustainable Living
• 0 Comments

If you take a quick walk around your block and carefully scan the curb, you’re almost certain to see at least one cigarette filter, sometimes called a “butt.” There’s a reason for that: cigarette filters are the most common form of litter on Earth. Researchers are now calling for a total ban on cigarette filters.

Fast facts: what you should know

• When it comes to litter in our environment, cigarette filters top the charts as the most common culprit worldwide.
• These filters don’t provide any health benefits for humans, but they’re responsible for a significant chunk of plastic pollution, thanks to their cellulose acetate composition.
• Cigarette filters also harbor contaminants that contribute to the growing chemical load on our planet, posing serious ecological threats.
• Considering their harmful nature, it’s time we start treating cigarette filters as hazardous waste.
• A sensible step forward would be to ban cellulose acetate cigarette filters, helping us take a giant leap toward a cleaner and healthier environment.

The environmental toll of cigarette filters being littered in nature has been snapped into focus by researchers at the University of Gothenburg. Their research found that cigarette filters leach thousands of different toxic chemicals into the environment, many of which are known to harm aquatic wildlife.

The problem with cigarette filters

Cigarette filters, often overlooked, have a substantial impact on both personal health and the environment. Let’s delve into the ways they harm both.

On a personal health level, cigarette filters offer no real benefits, and in fact, they may exacerbate the harms of smoking. While they were initially designed to reduce tar and nicotine intake, research has shown that this design can give smokers a false sense of security, leading them to inhale more deeply and frequently. This intensified smoking behavior can ultimately increase the health risks associated with tobacco use. Furthermore, discarded cigarette butts, which often contain toxic substances like nicotine and heavy metals, can pose ingestion risks to curious children and pets.

When it comes to the environment, cigarette filters are a pervasive source of pollution. They are the most abundant litter item found globally. The filters are primarily composed of cellulose acetate, a form of plastic. These filters take years to degrade, and during this time, they can break down into microplastics, which infiltrate soil and water systems. Marine life can ingest these microplastics, leading to a cascade of ecological problems up the food chain. Additionally, the chemicals present in the filters can leach into the environment, further contaminating ecosystems.

Moreover, the production of cigarette filters involves a substantial carbon footprint, from the cultivation of tobacco to the manufacturing and transportation of these products. This contributes to climate change and its associated health risks, affecting populations worldwide.

It’s time for a ban

In an opinion piece, the researchers are calling for a total ban on cigarette filters. They say that over the past thirty years, used cigarette filters, commonly referred to as “butts,” have consistently ranked among the most prevalent litter items collected during urban and coastal clean-up efforts. It’s estimated that a staggering 4.5 trillion cigarette butts find their way into the environment annually.

Studies have shown that over 65% of smokers litter these used filters, surpassing the littering rate of other disposable items. This behavior might be rooted in a mistaken belief that cigarette butts are not made of plastic and are biodegradable.

However, the reality is quite different. Used cigarette filters can take more than a decade to decompose fully and are a significant source of microplastic pollution. Each cigarette filter contains approximately 15,000 tiny plastic fibers, which can be released into the environment at a rate of around 100 microplastic fibers per day per filter.

“We therefore propose an outright ban on cigarette filters, a relatively minor institutional change that would reduce pollution and minimize an all-too-common form of single-use plastic debris containing multiple toxic chemicals,” the authors write. “Banning plastic filters would facilitate the transition towards more sustainable consumption, and as such, aligns with the principles of Earth stewardship as well as the broad international mandate to develop a UN Treaty to end plastic pollution.

What would a total ban accomplish?

Implementing a total ban on cigarette filters would have several significant impacts on both public health and the environment. Let’s explore the potential outcomes:

1. Reduced Environmental Pollution

A total ban on cigarette filters would lead to a substantial reduction in litter. Cigarette filters are among the most common forms of litter found in urban and natural environments. By eliminating them, we would significantly reduce the visual blight and ecological harm caused by discarded filters.

2. Decreased Microplastic Pollution

Cigarette filters are primarily made of cellulose acetate, a form of plastic. Banning filters would help curb the release of microplastics into the environment. These tiny plastic particles are known to harm marine life and ecosystems, and their reduction would contribute to cleaner oceans and less pollution in soil and water.

3. Healthier Ecosystems

Reducing the number of discarded cigarette filters means less exposure to toxic chemicals and contaminants from these filters for wildlife. Marine organisms, in particular, would benefit from a decrease in microplastic contamination in their habitats.

4. Reduced Fire Risk

Cigarette filters have been associated with wildfires when carelessly discarded in dry areas. A ban would mitigate this risk, potentially reducing the incidence and scale of wildfires caused by discarded cigarettes.

5. Healthier Smoking Habits

While the ban focuses on the environmental impact, it could also have positive implications for public health. Smokers would no longer have the option of filters, potentially leading some to reconsider or reduce their smoking habit, which could, in turn, lead to health benefits for individuals.

6. Economic Considerations

Banning cigarette filters might have economic implications for the tobacco industry and related sectors. It’s essential to consider potential consequences for manufacturers and tobacco farmers, which could include job displacement and economic shifts.

7. Increased Awareness

A filter ban would also raise awareness about the environmental consequences of cigarette waste. Smokers and the general public would become more conscious of the impact of their choices on the environment, potentially leading to broader discussions about sustainable habits.

In conclusion, a total ban on cigarette filters would primarily aim to reduce environmental pollution and microplastic contamination, potentially leading to healthier ecosystems. However, it’s crucial to consider the broader implications, including potential effects on public health and the economy, when discussing such a ban.

What about biodegradable filters?

Biodegradable cigarette filters offer a potential environmental alternative to traditional non-biodegradable filters, typically made from materials like cellulose acetate. Examining the advantages and disadvantages of biodegradable filters is essential to understanding their overall impact on both public health and the environment.

On the positive side, biodegradable filters are designed to break down more easily in the environment, offering a solution to the persistent litter problem associated with non-biodegradable filters. They can help reduce the unsightly presence of cigarette butts in public spaces and contribute to cleaner urban and natural environments. Additionally, these filters generate fewer microplastics as they decompose, thereby reducing harm to ecosystems and wildlife, which is a critical concern given the detrimental effects of microplastics on aquatic life.

The adoption of biodegradable filters by tobacco companies can improve their image and demonstrate a commitment to environmental responsibility. This shift aligns with growing public awareness and concern about the environmental impact of various products, including those related to the tobacco industry.

However, there are some drawbacks to consider when evaluating biodegradable filters. While they may reduce the environmental impact of cigarette litter, they do not address the fundamental health risks associated with smoking. Smokers are still exposed to the harmful chemicals and toxins present in cigarettes, irrespective of the filter’s biodegradability.

Additionally, there is a concern that the perception of a biodegradable filter might encourage some smokers to be less conscientious about proper disposal. The belief that the filter will harmlessly degrade in the environment could inadvertently lead to increased littering, undermining the intended environmental benefits.

Manufacturing biodegradable filters can be more complex and costly than producing conventional filters, which could potentially result in higher prices for tobacco products. This financial consideration may impact consumer behavior and purchasing choices.
Perhaps most importantly, the speed at which biodegradable filters break down can vary depending on environmental conditions. In some cases, they may persist in the environment for an extended period before fully decomposing, potentially diminishing their effectiveness in reducing litter quickly.

Biodegradable cigarette filters offer a more environmentally responsible option compared to non-biodegradable filters. However, it’s crucial to recognize that they do not address the health hazards of smoking, and their success in reducing litter depends on proper disposal and public behavior. The choice between biodegradable and non-biodegradable filters should be made as part of a comprehensive strategy to address both the environmental and health challenges posed by tobacco products.