Govande 1

Ashlesha Govande

Mr. White

English 12AP-3

30 September 2016

1.Czar, Andrs, et al. "Plastic debris in the open ocean." Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences 111.28 (2014): 10239-10244. 2. The main purpose of the work is to bring to attention
the consequences regarding the accumulation of floating plastic debris in the ocean. Studies of
the plastic pollution suggest that much of the plastic debris ends up in a vortex across the five
oceans. 3. Plastic materials are being made, used, and disposed of at an astonishing rate and this
consumption is leading to a visible accumulation in the oceans. Plastic pollution eventually
become microplastics when they are broken down by solar radiation or wave fragmentation. As
size of the fragments decreases it is likely ingested by a range of organisms, who are also
ingesting harmful chemicals in the originally produced plastic. 4. The possible audience could be
a concerned individual or an ecologist. 5. The information is relatively recent and uses data from
experiments carried out between 2010-2011. 6. The work includes graphs and charts for visual
representation. 7. There are no apparent weaknesses in the journal, and there is a bias against the
production and consumption of plastics materials.

2. 1. Eriksen, Marcus, et al. "Plastic pollution in the world's oceans: more than 5 trillion plastic
pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea." PloS one9.12 (2014): e111913. 2. The main
purpose of the work is to give an estimate of the total plastic pollution in the ocean globally and
the effects it has on marine life. 3. Plastic is easily distributed across the oceans due to its
durability, even though it is considered hazardous waste. Marine lives ranging from zooplankton
to marine reptiles absorb chemicals from plastics and can cause the organisms to die. New
experiments are being done to figure out the total plastic pollution and the spread of the major
types of plastics causing the pollution. 4. The possible audience could be a marine biologist,
oceanographer, or concerned individual. 5. The information is relevant and recent with the
publishing year of 2014 and proper graphs and links to research for the experiment. 6. There are
no special features. 7. There are no apparent weaknesses or bias.

3. 1. Sindermann, Carl J. Ocean pollution: effects on living resources and humans. CRC press,
1995. 2. The main purpose of the work is to make the human species as a whole realize the
destruction we have caused to the oceans and environment since the Industrial Revolution. 3.
Pollution in coastal waters is increasing everyday and it all leads back to the chemicals and
processing that has been used since the Industrial Revolution. The work summarizes the
consequences of contamination that happens due to human activity, As the population and
industries expand, ocean dumping considerably rises. 4. The possible audience could be
scientists, specifically oceanographers and ecologists. 5. The information is relevant as it is
published in a book in 1996. 6. There are no special features in the book. 7. There are no
apparent weaknesses or bias in the book.
 Govande 2

4. 1. Ornell, Cassandra. A Holistic Approach to Reducing Plastic Marine Debris in Coastal

North Carolina. Diss. Duke University, 2011. 2. The main purpose of the work is to raise
awareness of the rising problems of plastic debris in coastal waters and also provide research and
experiments for reducing the problem. The pollution problem is addressed locally, nationally, and
uses voluntary and mandatory implementation. There are two methods used to increase
awareness and encourage people to help the environment and stop the use of plastic bags. 3. The
two methods used to increase awareness of pollution in the ocean are called bottom-up and top-
down. The bottom-up method includes more interaction with people by educating the public and
holding public beach cleanups to raise awareness. The second method focuses on studying the
positive effects of the ban on plastic bags in coastal North Carolina. 4. The possible audience
could be ecologists or individuals wanting to learn about pollution. 5. The information is
relatively relevant as it was published in 2011. Its also reliable because it is an experiment
published the by the Duke University Library. 6. There are no special features. 7. There are no
apparent weaknesses or bias.

5. 1. Barnes, David KA, et al. "Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global
environments." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364.1526
(2009): 1985-1998. 2. The main purpose of the work is to inform the public what has happened
to our environment since the mass production of plastics began in the 1950s. Mega- and Micro-
plastics have accumulated in high densities on shorelines and in the ocean itself. The
environmental consequences are not completely understood, but it is known to cause harm to a
variety of organisms. 3. Plastic debris can survive hundreds and thousands of years even though
most of these locations would be in the deep sea. Plastic in the ocean poses a threat to marine life
with its chemical breakdown, and the possibility of animals choking on it. In recent years, plastic
debris in the ocean has been stable instead of increasing, however it is still being mass produced.
4. The possible audience for this work could be oceanographers or concerned individuals. 5. The
information could be outdated at a publishing date of 2009 since many environmental policies
could have changed. The work also provides graphs and data from that year. 6. There are no
special features in the work. 7. There are no weaknesses or biases in the report.