This page is referenced by:

• 1 2016-02-09T09:51:29-08:00 Microbeads 36 plain 2016-04-03T13:34:43-07:00 Beat the Microbead (an international campaign against microbeads in cosmetics) defines microbeads/plastics as:

  "... plastic pieces or fibres measuring less than 5mm."

  
  The negative environmental impacts associated with the discard of microbeads found in cosmetic products is something that I have encountered frequently in the news and in some of my university courses. Microbeads are added to many personal care products to act as abrasives or exfoliants in things such as body scrubs and toothpastes; the small plastic beads make their way down drains, past sewage treatment plants, and into the world's oceans and water tables. Many environmental advocate groups, as well as scientists, have been pushing for a worldwide ban of microbeads due to their ability to absorb toxins from their surrounding environment (e.g. as they pass threw sewage) and their bioavailable nature. The beads are comprised of toxin absorbing plastics going by the names polyethylene, polypropylene, polyethylene terephthalate, and polymethyl methacrylate. Given the constraints of this course, this may be too broad of an issue to tackle in its entirety, so I have chosen to focus on claims made by a specific environmental movement group called The Story of Stuff Project. This group advocates for better waste practices and changes in human consumption to improve the health of our planet. Many claims made by this group have been supported by scientific evidence and have resulted in the ban of microbead products for resale in many states. The specific instance I will be focusing on is recent law AB 888 that has been passed in California to ban microbeads. In this map, I will outline who is involved in the microbead debate, how this controversy has been shaped over time, what ultimately led to the implication of this specific law, and the various actors affected by the law's existence.