More than 350,000 chemical substances are currently listed in global trade, a continuous flow of novel entities that is pushing humanity beyond one of the most critical planetary boundaries. A geographer by training, expert in circular economy and specialist in environmental systems, Henri Bourgeois-Costa works at the Tara Ocean Foundation, where he supports scientific research and awareness-raising actions on plastic pollution and emerging chemicals that threaten our biosphere.
Today, he answers five questions about this often overlooked planetary boundary: the introduction of new entities, microplastics, endocrine disruptors and radioactive products, which are permanently disrupting the balance of terrestrial and marine ecosystems.
1. What are novel entities and why do they constitute a major planetary boundary?
Novel entities refer to all artificial substances introduced into the environment by human activity.
Their emergence is directly linked to technological and industrial growth, often without consideration for long-term environmental impacts: ‘They arose from the needs of industrial production and the technical capabilities that humanity has acquired […], without having a very clear vision of the impact of transferring these entities into the environment.’
The seriousness of this planetary boundary is based on a strict rule: zero tolerance. “The planetary boundary that scientists have defined is a zero boundary. From the moment we introduce new entities, and we are unable to say that they are absolutely neutral, that we are able to prevent any leakage into the environment […], we must avoid them.‘ Henri insists: ’Today, the situation is very clear: we are using entities that are highly disruptive. This boundary has been greatly exceeded.”
2. Why does plastic embody this issue of novel entities so well?
Plastic is emblematic of this crisis because it is ubiquitous and loaded with chemical additives. Henri explains it clearly: “Plastic is a synthetic material […] based on carbon chemistry, derived from petroleum. […] There are several thousand of them, 16,000 according to the data, which improve their technical performance but also add complexity to their impact.”
This material is now everywhere: ‘The only places where it is not found are places where we are not looking for it. […] It is found in our food, in the air we breathe, in our own cells.’ This observation highlights global and uncontrolled contamination.
The consequences are both visible and invisible: millions of birds and marine mammals die every year, but ‘they are only the tip of the iceberg.’ The majority of plastics in the environment are microplastics, less than 5 mm in size, which ‘will penetrate much deeper into the food chain.’
More than 350,000 synthetic chemicals are currently registered for production and commercial use worldwide.
(Source: Persson et al., 2022 – Environmental Science & Technology)
These particles have two major effects: physical (they prevent organisms from feeding properly) and chemical: “a quarter of additives are problematic for environmental or human health”. In addition, they act as “magnets” for toxins (pesticides, heavy metals, hydrocarbons) and as biological carriers: ’these microplastics will also serve as carriers for viruses, bacteria […]. This creates a plastisphere, a living component that is fundamentally different from anything the Holocene has ever known.”
3. Are there any effective solutions for managing or reducing this pollution?
Henri’s answer is clear: ‘The solution, in fact, lies in nature itself. […] We need to leave it alone so that it can do its job.’ In other words, the priority is prevention, not collection or remediation.
Recovering plastics, especially microplastics, is technically and ecologically unrealistic: ‘Collecting 5 mm pieces of plastic is like trying to empty the oceans with a teaspoon. It’s absolutely unfeasible.’ Worse still, it could ‘remove all the micro-organisms that have colonised these plastics, causing an imbalance with unknown consequences.’
As for recycling, often seen as a miracle solution, it has serious limitations: “it’s an idea with enormous limitations. […] Recycling concentrates toxicity. […] Studies already show that recycled plastics are more toxic to the environment than virgin plastics.”
The scientist therefore advocates a drastic reduction in the use of plastics, particularly those that are ‘non-essential, very short-lived or the most toxic.’
4. What role can businesses play in addressing these challenges? Is the circular economy a real solution?
Henri calls for a radical change in the way we think about the economy: ‘The circular economy is not just about the circularity of materials. It is defined as the ability to build an economic system that is part of the circularity of large ecosystems.’ He cites the medical maxim ‘primum non nocere’ (first, do no harm) as the founding principle of this new model.
For businesses, this means rethinking products, limiting impact at source, favouring reusable and non-toxic materials, and integrating environmental impact into the heart of the economic model: ‘We need to rethink our vision of business […] by considering the environment not as just one item among many, but as the subject around which all others must revolve.’ “
But the task is complex, because even large companies are unaware of the exact composition of their materials: ‘they admit that they do not know exactly what is in their formulations, because suppliers protect this information as a trade secret.’ He therefore supports initiatives such as the international treaty on plastics aimed at imposing transparency in chemical formulations.
5. Le citoyen peut-il agir à son échelle ou est-ce une illusion ?
Faced with the scale of pollution caused by new entities, Henri Bourgeois-Costa calls for a certain clarity regarding the role of the individual. In his view, ‘the small gesture that would save the planet is a figment of the imagination,’ because our behaviour is largely constrained by systems of production, distribution and consumption that we do not control. He takes the example of yoghurt: choosing between a polluting plastic pot or a disposable glass pot with a high carbon footprint illustrates the dilemma faced by individual consumers. “The only real solution would be bulk packaging with locally reused packaging, but this does not yet exist on a large scale. “
At the same time, he warns against certain ill-conceived innovations, such as lightweight composite packaging made of plastic but enriched with highly toxic fluorinated additives: “We reduce the weight, but we increase the toxicity. ‘ These maladaptations show that the issues cannot be addressed separately. Because ultimately, he insists, ’there are not several issues, there is only one: life itself.” Plastic, carbon, water… these crises are only a problem because they threaten the balance of the living world.
Global warming: there is no miracle solution. Ideally, we need to use all the levers at our disposal and activate them simultaneously.
Henri Bourgeois-Costa is an expert in ecosystem geography and environmental advocacy. He has been working for the Tara Ocean Foundation since 2019, where he is responsible for institutional relations and international advocacy, particularly on plastic pollution. With extensive experience in the environmental non-profit sector, he works with political decision-makers, industrialists and in international negotiations to promote a circular economy and reduce marine pollution. His work focuses on implementing concrete and legally binding solutions, particularly in the context of the future global treaty on plastics.
