Pop quiz, which provides more oxygen: trees or the ocean? If you chose trees, you may be part of the ecological crisis that is crippling our planet. Although people equate saving trees to saving the planet, we must shift our gaze from the land to the deep blue. The ocean is the foundation of life, as it produces over 50 percent of the world’s oxygen, provides a habitat for innumerable species, and proffers a prodigious economic opportunity on a global scale.1 Though the ocean is one of the edifying building blocks of life, its importance and preservation are often overlooked. Multiple delusions have contributed to the idea that ramifications of anthropogenic activities are minimal: “changes in the ocean’s ecology are natural phenomenons”; “plastic waste is not a crucial threat to the ocean”; “the rate of influx of plastic into the ocean is slow.”

None of this is true.

Ocean plastic wastes are causing negative repercussions on the marine ecosystem and beyond. In 2018, a whale washed up onto the shore of Thailand, and a necropsy revealed that “more than 17 pounds of plastic” was in the whale’s stomach.2 Now, you might be thinking to yourself, ‘why does a whale that died across the world matter?’ I mean, when was the last time you actually saw a whale, right? Well, without whales, you can say goodbye to a lot of fish-related products and foods. Whales, a global keystone species, transfer nutrients from the deep sea to the surface of the ocean, which is essential for the survival of many species.3 A market analysis conducted in 2017 showed that 23 percent of dog food and 19 percent of cat food contained salmon.4 For pet owners, the price of pet food might exponentially increase due to the lack of nutrient cycle in the ocean, which can decrease salmon or other fish populations.

The tragedy of whales is only one of many posed upon marine species. A United Nations report published in 2016 estimated that globally, at least 800 species are affected by marine debris and approximately 80 percent of that is plastic.5 Ocean plastic waste can cause significant damage to marine fauna when ingested. Aquatic species that are affected by environmental damage range from fish to birds to mammals. Researchers from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (IRO) and Imperial College London (ICL) found a shocking fact: nearly 60 percent of all seabirds have consumed plastic, and that percentage will rise to an astonishing 99 percent by 2050.6 Due to the fact that the plastic ingested is often indigestible and not biodegradable, consuming such materials exposes animals to a high probability of starvation or suffocation -- the plastic can block their airways or fill up their stomachs. In other words, the majority of seabirds are at risk of dying due to our actions. Seabirds, like whales, are crucial to the environment, as they are nutrient recyclers.7 Meaning, the cycle of nutrients that is holding the foundation of the environment and our food supply together can be damaged. Seabirds are not alone: the entirety of the oceanic system is now under threat. At what point should we take action?

Now or never.

Ideally, the usage and production of plastic would be eradicated on a global scale. A total ban on plastic would also force the plastic industry to adopt more environmentally friendly methods and materials. Sounds amazing, right? Although a total ban on the use and production of plastic would be ideal, unfortunately, it is not feasible to simply outlaw all plastics. A ban on plastic would pose economic disadvantages and would spark a huge social backlash. In 2017 alone, the global plastic industry was worth $522.66 billion USD.8 Moreover, plastic plays a huge part in our daily lives. Plastic is incorporated into all facets of our day - from cups and straws to bags and packaging. Shutting down an entire industry is unheard of and implausible. So what are the options that are realistically attainable?

Reduce, reuse, recycle.

The three R’s are the keys to save the ocean from further devastation. Moreover, it is something that we, as individuals, can easily do. Decreasing the usage and demand for plastic is one of the best ways to solve the crisis. Even the small changes, such as carrying a reusable water bottle instead of using plastic straws, can make the difference. Similarly, reusing is also a way to combat environmental catastrophe. There is no need to waste money on a new plastic product when reusing is an option. Purchasing reusable canvas bags instead of single-use plastic bags is one of the ways to part take in saving the environment. Small actions matter.

If usage of plastic is unavoidable, then at the very least, recycle. Despite how large a threat plastic bottles pose to the ecosystem, participation in recycling still remains low. The issue is elucidated through the low recycling rate, as the Royal Statistics Society reported that 91perent of plastic bottles are not recycled (much of it ends up in the oceans).9  The ocean plastic crisis can be ameliorated through recycling. Recycling uses fewer materials, requiring less energy, leading toward a more environmentally sustainable society. For instance, recycled plastic bottles take 76 percent less energy to produce.10 Hence, it is imperative that individuals take part in the recycling movement. The recycling movement could save the Earth, and we must act now.

Not recycling can increase the chance of a heart attack by 53.7 percent. Ok, not really but would that need to be true to get people to recycle? In the end, it is up to you to care. Either you do or you do not. Does a heroin addict need any more details about the results of continued use besides premature death to really care? This problem does not go away if people just care; they need to actually do something about it. Be the solution to the problem rather than wait for it to miraculously change (which it would not).  Be informed (you are welcome), recycle, and do your part.