The ocean has long been the end of the pipe for plastic pollution, with ocean wildlife bearing the brunt of the overproduction and overconsumption of single-use plastics. The world now produces more plastics than at any point in history—hundreds of millions of tons each year—and more than 11 million metric tons are flowing into the ocean annually. That is equivalent to more than a garbage truck’s worth of plastics entering our ocean every minute.
How does plastic kill ocean animals?
When swallowed, these plastics can be deadly—causing blockages, twisting organs or even puncturing organ walls. Ingested plastics have been found in nearly 1,300 ocean animal species, including every family of mammals and seabirds, and all seven species of sea turtles. Concern about the ecological implications of plastic-induced death rates has fueled calls for policy solutions at every level of government, from the local to the international. However, it is hard to set policy goals without understanding the measurable risk plastic ingestion poses to these species.
Ocean Conservancy scientists, along with top researchers at the University of Toronto, Federal University of Alagoas in Brazil and the University of Tazmania, worked together to answer the question: how much plastic is too much? They sought to determine how much ingested plastic is likely to cause death in seabirds, sea turtles and marine mammals. In other words, we sought to figure out the actual number of pieces and volume of macroplastics (plastics greater than 5 milimeters) that those animals must have in their gut to cause death 90% of the time.
Get Ocean Updates in Your Inbox
Sign up with your email and never miss an update.
How much ingested plastic does it take to kill an ocean animal?
We compiled data from more than 10,000 necropsies—animal autopsies—of seabirds, sea turtles and marine mammals collected between the years 1900 and 2023 where we knew both the cause of death and whether and how much plastic the animal had eaten.
The results were alarming. We were surprised by the very small amount of plastic it takes to kill a seabird. We found that rubber (the kind balloons are made from) is the deadliest form of plastic to seabirds when ingested. It only takes six small pieces of rubber—each, on average, smaller than a pea in size—to kill a seabird.
Sea turtles are also surprisingly vulnerable, given their massive size: Less than half a baseball’s worth of plastics is likely to kill one in two Loggerhead turtles. Shockingly, nearly half of all sea turtles in our database had plastics in their guts at their time of death, which is especially troubling when you consider that five of the world’s seven sea turtle species are International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red-listed as threatened.
Our models found that marine mammals are especially vulnerable to the impacts of lost fishing debris, also known as ghost gear; when swallowed, with just 28 pieces—each smaller than a tennis ball—enough to kill a sperm whale. Additional key findings from our research for each of the animal groups we studied include:
- Seabirds
- About 35% of seabirds in our dataset had plastic in their digestive tracts.
- Roughly 5% of seabirds who had plastics in them died specifically from plastic ingestion.
- Hard plastics were consumed more frequently than all other material types, followed by soft plastics, fishing debris, rubber and foams.
- When a seabird consumes only three pieces of rubber, like balloon shreds, our models predict there is a 50% chance this consumption will lead to the animal’s death.
- Marine Mammals
- In marine mammals, fishing debris was the most frequently ingested plastic material, followed by soft plastics, rubber, hard plastics, foam and cloth.
- Roughly 12% of marine mammals in our dataset had plastic in their digestive tracts.
- Nearly 6% of marine mammals from our dataset with plastics inside died as a result of eating those plastics.
- When a marine mammal consumes just 12 pieces of soft plastic—like grocery bags—our models predict a 50% chance this action will lead to the animal’s death.
- Half a soccerball’s worth of soft plastic (by volume) is enough to kill 90% of individuals in most seal, sea lion, dolphin and porpoise species.
- Sea Turtles
- In sea turtles, soft plastics like grocery bags were found to be the most frequently ingested plastic material, followed by fishing debris, hard plastics, foams, rubber and cloth.
- Nearly 50% of individual sea turtles in our dataset had plastic in their digestive tracts
- About 9% of turtles that ingested plastic in our dataset died as a result of eating it.
- Over 4% of all turtles in our dataset died directly from plastic ingestion.
- Just 1.5 golf ball’s worth of plastic (by volume) is enough to kill 50% of adult loggerhead sea turtles.
What can this research do?
This research emphasizes the risks macroplastic pollution poses to the life of marine animals, and the risk varies by species and plastic type. Our findings provide key insights to inform future research and policy actions aimed at reducing plastic pollution and the harm it causes to ocean wildlife and ecosystems. These results also underscore that important interventions like beach cleanups and better management of plastic waste are critical for protecting marine species. Because some types of plastics are deadlier than others when swallowed by marine life, policies targeting those specific items (e.g., plastic bags and balloons) can play an important role in protecting vulnerable species from the harms of plastic pollution in the future.
It is imperative to tackle the global plastics crisis by taking actions at all levels, from local to federal to international. In the U.S., bills like the REUSE Act—bipartisan legislation that would require examination and enhancement of existing reuse and refill systems—is just one way to make a difference. Add your name now and call on lawmakers to support and pass the REUSE Act.
The post Does Eating Plastics Really Kill Ocean Animals? appeared first on Ocean Conservancy.
Ocean Acidification
Humans Just Flew Around the Moon This Week. But Would Babies Born There Ever Truly Feel Gravity? Ask Jellyfish Babies.
This week, NASA’s Artemis II crew made history by flying around the Moon and returning safely to Earth, the first human journey to the Moon’s vicinity in more than 50 years. It was a stunning reminder that humanity is no longer just dreaming about living beyond Earth. We are actively rehearsing for it.
And that leads to a much stranger, deeper question: even if one day we build skyscrapers on the Moon, raise families there, and turn space into a place to live, will babies born away from Earth develop a normal sense of gravity? Or will their bodies learn the universe differently?
To explore that question, NASA once turned to an unexpected stand-in for human babies: jellyfish babies. On the STS-40 mission, scientists sent thousands of tiny jellyfish polyps into space because jellyfish, like humans, rely on gravity-sensing structures to orient themselves. The experiment asked a simple but profound question: if a living body develops in microgravity, will it still know how to handle gravity later?
The answer was both fascinating and unsettling. The jellyfish developed in space in large numbers, but once back under Earth’s gravity, the ones that had developed in microgravity showed far more pulsing abnormalities than the Earth-grown controls. In other words, their bodies formed, but their sense of balance did not seem to work quite the same way.
That is why this old jellyfish experiment still matters today. Before we imagine lunar cities, schools, nurseries, and generations born off-world, we need to ask not only whether humans can survive in space, but whether developing there changes how the body understands something as basic as up, down, and movement. Jellyfish babies cannot tell us everything about human children, but they may have given us one of the first clues that life born beyond Earth might not come home unchanged.
Reference: https://nlsp.nasa.gov/view/lsdapub/lsda_experiment/0c10d660-6b12-573d-8c3b-e20e071aed3b
Image: GEOMAR, Sarah Uphoff
After a slight delay of the Maria S. Merian caused by late-arriving containers our research cruise MSM142 finally got underway. By last Tuesday (24.03.2026), the full scientific team had arrived in Nuuk, the capital of Greenland, and the ship reached port on Wednesday (25.03.2026) morning. That same day, scientists and technicians moved on board and immediately began preparations, assembling and testing our instruments. Although the mornings on Wednesday and Thursday were grey and overcast, the afternoons cleared up beautifully. This gave us valuable time to organize equipment on deck and store empty boxes back into the containers before departure.
Given the forecast of harsh conditions outside the fjord, we carried out the mandatory safety drill while still in harbour. This included practicing emergency procedures and boarding the lifeboat. After completing border control, we were finally ready to leave Nuuk. We set sail on March 27th, heading into the Labrador Sea to begin our mission. Even before starting scientific operations, we tested the setup for deploying our gliders without releasing them during the transit out of the fjord. Once we reached open waters, we were met by high waves the following morning. For some on board, this was their first experience under such rough sea conditions. Seasickness quickly became a challenge for a few, while scientific work had to be temporarily postponed due to the strong winds and sea conditions. Together with the crew, we discussed how best to adapt our measurement plans to the given weather conditions. On March 29th, we were finally able to begin our scientific program with the first CTD deployment. A CTD is an instrument used to measure conductivity, temperature, and depth, which are key parameters for understanding ocean structure.
During the following night, we continued with additional CTD stations and successfully recovered two moorings: DSOW 3 and DSOW 4, located south of Greenland. These moorings carry instruments at various depths that measure velocity, temperature, and salinity. DSOW 4 was redeployed on the same day, while DSOW 3 followed the next day. In addition, the bottles attached to the CTD’s rosette can be used to collect water samples from any desired depth. These samples can be used, for example, to determine the oxygen content, nutrient levels, and organic matter.
Both are part of the OSNAP array, a network of moorings spanning the subpolar North Atlantic. On these moorings are a few instruments, for example microcats which measure temperature, pressure and salinity.
We then conducted around 25 CTD stations spaced approximately 3 nautical miles apart across an Irminger ring identified from satellite data. This high-resolution sampling was necessary to capture the structure of an Irminger Ring, which had a radius of about 12 km wide.
The days leading up to April 2nd were marked by very rough weather conditions. Life on board became both challenging and, at times, unintentionally entertaining sliding chairs were not uncommon. During the night from April 1st to April 2nd, winds reached 11 Beaufort with gusts up to 65 knots, forcing us to pause our measurements. Fortunately, conditions improved by morning, allowing us to resume our work. As well as with the help of the crew we had to adapt to the harsh weather conditions to continue our scientific work. On the 3rd of April, we were able to deploy a few gliders and one float. An ocean glider is an autonomous underwater Vehicle, which you can steer remotely and send to different locations, while it is measuring oceanographic key parameters.
This research cruise focuses on understanding small-scale processes in the ocean and their connection to the spring bloom, an essential phase in marine ecosystem in subpolar regions. Despite the challenging start, we have already gathered valuable data and look forward to the weeks ahead in the Labrador Sea.
Despite their dramatic name, false killer whales aren’t an orca species. These animals are dolphins—members of the same extended family as the iconic “killer whale” (Orcinus orca). Compared to their namesake counterparts, these marine mammals are far less well-known than our ocean’s iconic orcas.
Let’s dive in and take a closer look at false killer whales—one of the ocean’s most social, yet lesser-known dolphin species.
Appearance and anatomy
False killer whales (Pseudorca crassidens) are among the largest members of the dolphin family (Delphinidae). Adults can grow up to 20 feet long and weigh between 1,500 and 3,000 pounds, though some individuals have been recorded weighing even more. For comparison, that’s roughly double the size of a bottlenose dolphin—and slightly larger than a typical sedan.
These animals are incredibly powerful swimmers with long, torpedo-shaped bodies that help them move efficiently through the open ocean in search of prey. Their skull structure is what earned them their name, as their head shape closely resembles that of orcas. With broad, rounded heads, muscular jaws and large cone-shaped teeth, early scientists were fascinated by the similarities between these two marine mammal species.
Although their heads may look somewhat like those of orcas, there are several ways to distinguish false killer whales from their larger namesake counterparts.
One of the most noticeable differences has to do with their coloration. While orcas are known for their iconic black-and-white pattern with paler underbellies, alternatively, false killer whales are typically a uniform dark gray to black in color—almost as if a small orca decided to roll around in the dirt. If you’ve ever seen the animated Disney classic 101 Dalmatians, the difference is a bit like when the puppies roll in soot to disguise themselves as labradors instead of showing their usual black-and-white spots.
Their teeth also present a differentiator. The scientific name Pseudorca crassidens translates almost literally to “thick-toothed false orca,” a nod to their sturdy, cone-shaped teeth that help these animals capture prey. Orcas tend to have more robust, bulbous heads, while false killer whales appear slightly narrower and more streamlined.
Behavior and diet
False killer whales are both highly efficient hunters and deeply social animals. It’s not unusual to see them hunting together both in small pods and larger groups as they pursue prey like fish and squid.
Scientists have even observed false killer whales sharing food with each other, a behavior that is very unusual for marine mammals. While some dolphin and whale species work together to pursue prey, they rarely actively share food. The sharing of food among false killer whales spotlights the strong social bonds within their pods. Researchers believe these tight-knit social connections help false killer whales thrive in offshore environments where they’re always on the move.
Maintaining these close bonds and coordinating successful hunts requires constant effective communication, and this is where false killer whales excel. Like other dolphins, they produce a variety of sounds like whistles and clicks to stay connected with their pod and locate prey using echolocation. In the deep offshore waters where they live, sound often becomes more important than sight, since sound travels much farther underwater than light.
Where they live
False killer whales are highly migratory and travel long distances throughout tropical and subtropical waters around the world. They prefer deeper waters far offshore, and this pelagic lifestyle can make them more difficult for scientists to study than many coastal dolphin species.
However, there are a few places where researchers have been able to learn more about them—including the waters surrounding the Hawaiian Islands.
Scientists have identified three distinct groups of false killer whales in and around Hawaii, but one well-studied group stays close to the main Hawaiian Islands year-round. Unfortunately, researchers estimate that only about 140 individuals remained in 2022, with populations expected to decline without action to protect them. This is exactly why this group is listed as endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act and is considered one of the most vulnerable marine mammal populations in U.S. waters.
Never Miss An Update
Sign up for Ocean Conservancy text messages today.
Current threats to survival
False killer whales are currently listed as Near Threatened on the IUCN Red List. From climate change-induced ocean acidification and harmful algal blooms to marine debris and fishing bycatch, false killer whales face the same mounting pressures that are impacting marine ecosystems around the world. As their prey becomes scarce due to increasing threats, populations of top predators like these decline, serving as a powerful signal that the ocean’s overall health is in critical need of protection.
Here at Ocean Conservancy, we’re working daily to confront these threats head-on and protect the ecosystems and wildlife we all cherish so dearly. But we can’t do it without you. Support from ocean lovers is what powers our work to protect our ocean, and right now, our planet needs all the help it can get. Visit Ocean Conservancy’s Action Center today and join our movement to create a better future for our ocean, forever and for everyone.
The post All About False Killer Whales appeared first on Ocean Conservancy.
https://oceanconservancy.org/blog/2026/03/31/false-killer-whales/
-
Climate Change8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases8 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Renewable Energy6 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits