Each year, over 11 million metric tons of plastic end up in the ocean, which is like dumping a garbage truck full of plastic every minute. For years, we’ve known that marine animals eat this debris, but no one had measured exactly how much plastic it takes to kill them. Dr. Erin Murphy, who leads ocean plastics research at the Ocean Conservancy, is the principal author of a major study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Her team analyzed more than 10,000 necropsies from 95 species of seabirds, sea turtles, and marine mammals worldwide. Earth911’s summary describes this critical study, which found lethal plastic thresholds that could change how we view the plastic crisis.
The study measured how deadly different types of plastic are to sea life, which makes the results especially useful for policymakers. Each finding suggests a clear policy action, such as banning balloon releases like Florida has done, banning plastic bags as in California’s SB 54, or improving how fishing gear is marked and recovered. Still, Erin points out that focusing only on certain plastics is not enough. Her team found that even small amounts of any plastic can be dangerous. As she says, “At the end of the day, there is too much plastic in the ocean,” and we need big changes at every stage of the plastics life cycle, from production to disposal.
There’s encouraging evidence that interventions work. Communities in Hawaii conducted large-scale beach cleanups and saw the Hawaiian monk seal population rebound. A study published in Science confirmed that bag bans reduce plastic on beaches by 25 to 47%. And Ocean Conservancy’s International Coastal Cleanup, now in its 40th year, removed more than a million plastic bags from beaches last year. These actions address a parallel crisis in human health that is building from the same pollution source. Most of the microplastics now found in humans and around the world began as the same macroplastics that are killing puffins and turtles. As Erin puts it, “I do view this all as part of the same crisis.”
You can read the full study at pnas.org and learn more about Ocean Conservancy’s work at oceanconservancy.org.
Share this episode with a friend.
- Subscribe to Sustainability In Your Ear on iTunes
- Follow Sustainability In Your Ear on Spreaker, iHeartRadio, or YouTube
Interview Transcript
Mitch Ratcliffe 0:00
Hello, good morning, good afternoon or good evening, wherever you are on this beautiful planet of ours. Welcome to Sustainability In Your Ear. This is the podcast conversation about accelerating the transition to a sustainable, carbon-neutral society, and I’m your host, Mitch Ratcliffe. Thanks for joining the conversation today.
We’re going to talk about ocean plastics. Every year, more than 11 million metric tons of plastic enters the ocean. That’s the equivalent of dumping a garbage truck worth of plastic every minute. And we’ve known for decades that marine animals eat this debris. But until recently, no one had systematically quantified how much plastic it actually takes to kill them.
And the answer is, it turns out, disturbing. Less than three sugar cubes worth of plastic increases an Atlantic puffin’s risk of dying by 90%. A loggerhead turtle reaches the same threshold at about two baseballs worth, and for a harbor porpoise, a mass of plastic roughly the size of a soccer ball can kill. More concerning, at the 50% mortality level — that is, where half the animals who consume the plastic die — the volumes that kill them shrink to less than one sugar cube for a puffin and half a baseball for a loggerhead turtle.
Our guest today, Dr. Erin Murphy, is the manager of ocean plastics research at the Ocean Conservancy, and lead author of the study that produced these findings, published last month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Her team’s research analyzed more than 10,000 necroscopies across 95 species of seabirds, sea turtles, and marine mammals worldwide. It’s the most comprehensive assessment yet of how different plastic types — soft film like bags, hard fragments, synthetic rubber from balloons, and abandoned fishing gear — translate into mortality across marine life.
The findings matter beyond ocean conservation. A 2024 study in the New England Journal of Medicine found microplastics embedded in human arterial plaque of cardiovascular surgery patients, and those with detectable plastics were 4.5 times more likely to suffer a heart attack, stroke, or death in the following three years. The same polymers killing seabirds and sea turtles — polyethylene, PVC, and their chemical additives — are found in human blood, lungs, liver, and placenta.
Dr. Murphy’s research offers policymakers what they’ve been asking for: science-based data to inform decisions about which plastics to regulate and how aggressively to act. Nearly half the animals in her study that had ingested plastics were threatened or endangered species, and with global negotiations on a binding plastic treaty continuing and extended producer responsibility programs expanding across the United States, the timing of this research could not be more relevant.
So we’ll talk with Erin about what her team found, why balloon fragments are amongst the deadliest items for seabirds, how fishing gear became the leading killer of marine animals, and what her research means for the humans who share a planet and a body burden with these species. You can read the full study at pnas.org and find Ocean Conservancy’s work at oceanconservancy.org. Ocean Conservancy is all one word, no space, no dash. Oceanconservancy.org.
So how much plastic is too much for wildlife and for humans? Let’s find out right after this brief commercial break.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Welcome to the show, Erin. How you doing today?
Erin Murphy 3:44
I’m doing well. Thank you so much for having me.
Mitch Ratcliffe 3:46
Well, thank you for joining me, and for this really important research. It was a fascinating read. We wrote it up, and I’m really pleased that you would join us to talk about it today. So can you explain what made this study different from previous attempts to quantify plastics’ lethality to marine life?
Erin Murphy 4:01
Yeah. So first, I’ll specify that we focus specifically on macroplastics, which are just plastics that are bigger than five millimeters in length. There’s more research on how microplastics, which are these smaller plastics, can harm animals, because scientists can study these in laboratory settings. Of course, it’s not feasible or ethical to feed animals like whales, sea turtles, or seabirds large plastic items and study what happens to them in the lab. And so as scientists, we really have to depend on opportunistically collecting dead animals in the environment and looking at what’s inside them to understand what’s happening with these bigger plastics.
And so previous research has looked at these sorts of threats as well, but they focused on fewer species, on smaller geographic areas, and they didn’t differentiate by plastic type, like hard plastics versus soft plastics. So they were really important for laying the groundwork for our larger study. But we were actually able to look globally and look at a broader set of species, and also differentiate by these different plastic types and by species size as well, which allowed us to get at some of these species-level understandings.
Mitch Ratcliffe 5:13
So the unfortunate truth is, we are feeding these animals this material by throwing it all away. That is a stark way of starting this conversation. And you use a lot of illustrative examples, like three sugar cubes worth of macroplastic can kill a puffin. How did you arrive at those kind of volume-based comparisons, and why is translating your data into those relatable measures important?
Erin Murphy 5:37
Yeah, so when we did this in the study, we actually looked at the influence of volume based on the animal’s body length. So we reported all of this as a deadly volume per centimeter of body length. But telling people 0.098 centimeters cubed per centimeter doesn’t really mean anything to them. And honestly, when I first got those centimeter-based thresholds, it didn’t mean that much to me.
And so we thought that choosing some iconic species that people could picture would help, but still saying, you know, three centimeters cubed of plastic kills a puffin, or 220 centimeters cubed of plastic kills a loggerhead, doesn’t really paint a picture in people’s heads, and three sugar cubes or a baseball are much easier to picture.
So we chose to do this because I think when people can picture these items, they can really understand that volume, and people do use plastic every single day, and so having volumes like that to compare to allows them to think about how little plastic can kill animals, especially when we compare it to how much we produce or use globally.
Mitch Ratcliffe 6:42
Can you put in context how long it takes for a puffin, for instance, to eat that much plastic? What do they eat in a day or a week generally?
Erin Murphy 6:52
Yeah, that’s a great question, and it’s actually the next step in our research. So to estimate the risk that something poses to wildlife, we have to understand two things. One is your question: how likely are they to be exposed to this threat? The second is, if they are exposed to it, how likely is it to harm them? And so this research really focused entirely on that second piece.
But to fully understand risk, we have to dig deeper into the first part, and that’s what we call likelihood of exposure. And so for puffins specifically, there’s not a lot of research, but we do know a lot about what species are eating, and we know that different species are more or less likely to eat plastic based on where they live, what they eat, and how they feed. So we’re really excited to be working with some really amazing researchers over the next few years to think about how we can connect exposure for these animals to the lethality and understand risk in a more comprehensive way.
Mitch Ratcliffe 7:48
I want to get a sense of what you found. You mentioned in the study that one whale can have a three-gallon bucket in its stomach. What’s the range of objects that you encountered as you were doing the research?
Erin Murphy 8:00
Yeah, this was pretty unbelievable to me, actually, some of the things that we saw in animals, and I’ll just give a few items that stood out to me. But there’s many more. Part of an oar handle from a plastic — or a plastic belt, webbing from the back of a lawn chair, a koozie, rubber pencil topper, fake Easter grass, ice cream tubs, single-use coffee pods, bungee cords, tons of different types of gear, ropes, nets, fishing line.
But I’ll just illustrate kind of how dramatic this can look with one example that really stood out to me, on a sperm whale that researchers in Spain reported on. Sperm whales feed very deep in the ocean, and they use echolocation to find their food. So it may be particularly hard for them to tell plastic from prey. And in this case, it seems like an entire greenhouse washed into the ocean, and this sperm whale happened upon it. It had plastic film cover material for a greenhouse in its stomach, along with a flower pot, a piece of a hose, a plastic burlap sack, plastic craft, and plastic spray bottle, and even fake plastic mulch in its stomach. And unfortunately, this was one of the individuals that did lose its life to plastic ingestion.
Mitch Ratcliffe 9:23
That’s — I mean, that’s shocking in so many ways. You found that one in five animals had plastic in their digestive tract when they died. Was this percentage higher or lower, and in the context of your previous answer, more or less shocking than you expected?
Erin Murphy 9:45
Yeah, I think, you know, it was higher than I expected. And it’s funny, because all of our research was based on previous research. It was a meta-analysis. So we collected data from existing literature. And I’d seen some, you know, similar numbers then reported at more local scales. But I think it still really shocked me to look at so many studies and see, you know, for sea turtles, that was one in two. Sea turtles had plastic in their gut. And for seabirds, one in three.
And when thinking about that at a global scale, that felt higher to me than it should be, and I suppose it’s because it is higher than it should be. These really are high ingestion rates. And for some of these individuals, the bulk amount of plastic in their gut, like that sperm whale, is particularly shocking.
Mitch Ratcliffe 10:35
I want to step back just for a second and talk about how long this kind of research has been going on. Because when I was a child, oceanography was very much in its infancy. How aggressively are we trying to understand what we’re doing to the ocean environment at this point, and where do you think we are in terms of the long arc of beginning to reach that understanding?
Erin Murphy 10:58
Yeah, I don’t know if we’ll ever fully understand it, which is one of the things that makes studying the ocean so interesting. It’s so complex and vast. But, you know, we’ve come a long way, and for plastic pollution in particular, the ’70s was really when we started seeing those first reports of animals eating plastics. You know, and it’s been 50 years since then. Now we have evidence of plastic ingestion in more than 1,300 species, and we’re starting to be able to get at these really more complicated analyses that help us understand like the potential quantity that kills an animal, like this one, or what does that mean possibly for populations.
I think the thing that’s been really impressive in the last decade, though, is how much research has been done on plastics. In particular, 10 years ago, roughly, the first study came out by Jambeck et al. that gave us an idea of the amount of plastic that was getting into the environment. And since then, we have learned so much as a scientific community, and people are working really hard to try to understand what these vast amounts of ocean plastic mean for ecosystems, for human health, for fishing industries and other marine industries that really depend on a healthy ocean, and we’ve been doing a lot of research on how to address it. So I don’t think we’ll ever fully understand everything that we’re doing to the ocean, but I think we’re working hard as a scientific community to get there.
Mitch Ratcliffe 12:38
It’s really disturbing to think about, because plastic in the 1970s was really only — was 10 years into widespread use, and widespread compared to today is nothing, since half the plastic we’ve manufactured in history has been made since 2002. So it sounds like what we’re really delving into now is a real-time accounting of the damage that we’re doing. How do you as a scientist think about what your goal is in terms of bringing the consequences of our decisions back to the public so we can think about it?
Erin Murphy 13:11
Yeah, that’s why I feel very lucky to work with an organization like Ocean Conservancy. We conduct research that we know governments and decision makers need to help address these problems, and we have a policy team and a communications team that are really well trained on helping us bring this research to the decision makers.
And the type of research we’re doing here, in particular on risk assessments, is something that governments are really craving. They want to set science-based targets as they try to address plastic pollution, and part of that is understanding environmental thresholds that we should be aiming for to better protect marine wildlife, to better protect marine ecosystems.
And so when we do research like this, a big part is getting it into the literature, in this sense to the scientific community, but it’s also working with our policy team and our communications team to make sure the public hears about it, and to make sure that decision makers nationally and abroad hear about the work that we’re doing, and can use this to help inform science-based targets that they’re setting right now.
Mitch Ratcliffe 14:22
So one of the materials that you found was most dangerous is rubber, particularly from balloons. It emerged as especially deadly for seabirds, where you estimated that just six pea-sized pieces could create a 90% mortality rate. What’s happening physiologically with balloon fragments that make them so lethal?
Erin Murphy 14:45
Yeah, so if you think about the design of a balloon, they’re super stretchy, and they’re long and they’re thin, and even the fragments seem to have this shape. And so they get stuck at those junctures in the gastrointestinal tract, like between the stomach and the intestine. And the gut moves things along through these wave-like contractions. And it seems like these stretchy materials just kind of stretch with it, and so the gut just isn’t able to move them through as easily. And we see similar things for those plastic bags as well.
Mitch Ratcliffe 15:20
Well, you also point out that sea turtles appear to mistake plastic bags for jellyfish. Is there anything we could do in terms of the chemistry of soft plastics or the appearance of soft plastics to make them less attractive to sea life?
Erin Murphy 15:35
Yeah, I don’t know if there’s a way that we can make them less attractive that I know of. And it’s unfortunate, because we know there are a lot of plastic bags in the environment compared to other plastics. Every year, Ocean Conservancy organizes the International Coastal Cleanup, and plastic bags are consistently in the top 10 items we see most frequently.
That being said, we do know ways of keeping plastic bags out of the ocean and protecting turtles in that way. And so every year — or in this last year, during our Coastal Cleanup — we collected, or our partner organizations collected, more than 1 million bags off our beaches. So this is really important for helping protect ocean animals, because those bags are already very close to their environment, and by removing them from beaches, we prevent them from getting into the ocean.
We also know that plastic bag bans, like the policy that California just implemented, are very effective in reducing the threat that plastic bags pose to marine wildlife, and help by preventing them from getting into the environment in the first place. So there was a recent study published in Science that actually showed that communities that implement bag bans, whether that’s a city, a state, or a country, do meaningfully reduce the amount of plastic bags that end up on beaches by 25 to 47%. So that’s a really significant reduction, and just provides further evidence that we know how to address some of these threats. We have ways of measuring if policies are effective, and it’s really about preventing these bags from getting into the environment in the first place.
Mitch Ratcliffe 17:18
Another example of really short-term human thinking is the impact of fishing gear pollution. Can you talk a little about what you found in terms of what’s being tossed overboard by the boats that are hoping to treat the ocean as an ongoing resource and source of living?
Erin Murphy 17:36
Yeah. I mean, I think a lot of the fishing gear that’s lost is lost on accident. Fishing gear can be really expensive for fishermen. Like crab pots can cost thousands of dollars. And so these are very valuable resources for fishers, and they’re expensive to replace.
But unfortunately, one of the challenges with fishing in turbid and wavy environments around storms, especially with things that are set, is that some gear does get lost. And we did see interactions and ingestion of fishing gear by many of these animals. And partially that’s because gear attracts prey species. So we know that for some animals, they’re more likely to interact with fishing gear, and this isn’t just ingestion, but also being entangled in fishing gear, because, you know, that gear is still fishing. And for a lot of these bigger species, fish are their prey, and so they’re also being drawn to these devices, or this lost gear that might have their food in it.
Mitch Ratcliffe 18:44
And your study didn’t look at the external plastic lethality, it was only that which was consumed. So we don’t really fully understand what the consequences of, say, for instance, a net lost at sea is for the ocean yet? Or do we?
Erin Murphy 19:01
Yeah, we have — there’s some studies that have looked at this, but this is actually another study we’re working on. So one of the next papers we’re working on right now is looking at entanglement lethality, and that really will be important for understanding the impacts of plastic pollution together, because ingestion and entanglement, when we talk about these bigger plastics, are the two main threats that we see.
Mitch Ratcliffe 19:24
I feel like we’ve got our bearings and can have a really productive conversation. But folks, we’re going to take a quick commercial break. We’ll be right back.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. Now, let’s get back to my discussion with the Ocean Conservancy’s Dr. Erin Murphy, who led a groundbreaking study about the lethal effects of macroplastics in sea life. Erin, nearly half the animals that you studied that had ingested plastics were already listed as threatened. Is plastic pollution accelerating extinction risk, and what species do you feel are most endangered?
Erin Murphy 20:03
Yeah, that’s a great question. Right now, there’s not a lot of research yet on population-level effects of plastic pollution, and our study is really helping build that information out. But it’s just very difficult to understand what’s happening to populations that often we have trouble studying in the first place.
Still, for many marine species, the IUCN Red List notes plastic pollution as a significant threat. Six out of seven sea turtle species are threatened. We saw really high ingestion rates for sea turtles. We know that 5% of the turtles in our data set died from plastic ingestion.
So I think there is a lot of evidence suggesting that this could be contributing to extinction risk. And there are some studies that look at very specific populations that we know are vulnerable, like the Hawaiian monk seal, that have found that plastic pollution is contributing to extinction risk.
And the hopeful piece in the Hawaiian monk seal case was actually that as communities started doing large-scale cleanup efforts in the Hawaiian Islands, they actually saw a rebound of that population. So again, just a reminder that even though we know that this is something that is posing a threat to marine species we really care about, it’s also evidence that targeted and effective intervention strategies can be really important in helping some of these species rebound.
Mitch Ratcliffe 21:34
That’s encouraging. So it isn’t as though we’re doomed, or that nature is doomed. We can intervene in our behavior today and make a change for the better in the future. How does the Ocean Conservancy encourage people to do that?
Erin Murphy 21:49
Yeah, so there was a study that we — some of us co-authored, and the Ocean Conservancy supported — that came out in 2020 that looked at what we would really need to do on a global scale to reduce plastic pollution in the ocean meaningfully enough to hit some of our potential targets. And in this case, we were thinking about just returning to 2010 annual leakage rates into the environment.
And what we found is that we really need sweeping change to our relationship with plastic and our waste management systems. And so we found that to achieve this goal, we would need a 40% reduction in plastic production globally. We would need waste management to reach levels of 98 to 99%, depending on the income of the country. And we would need, annually, 40% of waste that gets into the environment to then be cleaned up.
And at Ocean Conservancy, we really work on policy efforts in all three of those big buckets. And so we have the International Coastal Cleanup, but we also work on upstream policies with our policy teams at the sub-national, national, and international levels to try to work towards some of those goals of reducing plastic production and better managing the plastic waste that we do use.
Mitch Ratcliffe 23:10
You used the phrase “our relationship with plastic,” which is an interesting concept. In 2024, the New England Journal of Medicine reported that microplastics were found in human arterial plaque, and that resulted in much higher risk for cardiovascular events. Do you see what you’re studying as a parallel crisis, or the same crisis, just in a different species?
Erin Murphy 23:35
Yeah, I view that — you know, so they were looking specifically at microplastics, and we focused on macroplastics in this study. That being said, most microplastics that are in the environment are breaking off of these larger macroplastics. So in that sense, I do view this all as part of the same crisis, and I think we need to think about all of the harms that plastic materials are causing to human health, to animal health, and to sociocultural outcomes like our marine and terrestrial industries that are affected by plastic pollution, and we need to think about comprehensive policies that are addressing all of those harms.
Mitch Ratcliffe 24:17
Are there studies that are showing the same types of impacts from plastic in human and non-human species that we can use to start to tell the story in that same illustrative way that you did with the sugar cube analogy, so that people really take this seriously? I mean, the problem with our society is that we’re accustomed to throwing everything away.
Erin Murphy 24:40
Yeah, so there’s a lot of really great research that’s being done on microplastic exposure in other marine and aquatic organisms, and those are more similar to what’s happening in humans. But that human research, and the research on sort of sub-lethal microplastic risks — like the risks to cardiovascular systems, nervous system, gastrointestinal tracts — those are all pretty new, and so this body of research is really building, and I think we’re going to learn a lot in the next decade.
Mitch Ratcliffe 25:14
Do you see an acceleration of your ability to make those kinds of conclusions — well-grounded conclusions — emerging as a result of the advent of something like artificial intelligence? Are we at the dawn of a scientific revolution?
Erin Murphy 25:33
You know, that’s a good question. I don’t know in what ways AI will change the way that we’re doing research. Definitely, the rate at which we are producing research has increased. There’s more people working on these issues, and the scientific process is really just about iterating as a community and building on what we know. And so I think what we’re seeing here is a large-scale interest in this plastics issue and a big concern by the scientific community and by the public.
And as we learn more, we can answer more complicated questions. And so I was only able to do my work because over the last five decades, people have been studying what plastic is in the animals and reporting on that, and we have thousands of published papers now that tell us about what animals are consuming. And each one of those papers is really important in producing this bigger picture. And as we have, you know, similarly more studies on these sort of individual systems and humans, using model organisms like mice, we will be able to do the same sort of thing of painting this bigger picture for humans as well.
Mitch Ratcliffe 26:48
So as we get this higher-resolution view of what we’re doing, both to the planet and to ourselves, how does Ocean Conservancy potentially use those storytelling opportunities to get us to think about things like plastic bans, or the impact of extended producer responsibility on not just what ends up in the environment, but what we design so that it doesn’t end up in the environment in the future? It’s a big, complicated, multifaceted story. Where are we going?
Erin Murphy 27:17
Yeah, that is true, and I am not the policy expert at Ocean Conservancy, but the work that they do is amazing. And they, you know, they go and they talk to the public about these issues and educate the public through blogs and other resources to make sure that people understand the scale of the problem. And they work really closely with local decision makers who are interested in addressing these problems and help them develop bills, help them build support for bills. And, you know, we’ll meet with legislators and other leaders to help them kind of understand the reason that these policies are useful.
So Ocean Conservancy in the last 10 years has done a lot of work on state bills, like helping to push forward California’s SB 54, or specific bills that are targeting problematic plastics. Like recently, Florida passed a balloon release ban. Ocean Conservancy was also really involved in pushing that.
And I think we have seen with plastic pollution — what, for me, one of the things that’s most comforting in studying plastic pollution is actually that people do really seem to care about this issue and do seem willing to make change. So when people find out what I research — strangers — they always tell me about what they’re doing to reduce their plastic footprint, and I think that’s just a sign that there is appetite for change, and people want to understand how to do it. And as an organization, we’re just trying to leverage that passion and that stewardship that does kind of inherently exist in people, especially when they see the plastics that they’re using, and use that and sound science to help develop policies that can actually make a change on this issue.
Mitch Ratcliffe 29:06
Building on what you mentioned a moment ago, based on your findings about which plastics are the most lethal, it sounds like it’s a blend. But should policymakers prioritize specific materials, or just look at broad categories? No more of this type.
Erin Murphy 29:23
I think we need to do both. So we did find that different plastics pose different levels of risk, and I think there’s policies that are smaller and easier to implement, like balloon release bans and bag bans, that are effective in targeting some of these problematic plastics specifically. You know, using that Hawaiian monk seal example as well, having very targeted and strategic cleanups can be really important for protecting animals at sea turtle nesting beaches or seabird nesting areas. There’s these areas that we know are of particular importance for animals.
But still, the total plastic thresholds that we found were also low, and we see all types of plastics in these animals. So at the end of the day, there is too much plastic in the ocean, and we do need sweeping reforms along the entire plastics life cycle, from production to management to disposal, to meaningfully address this issue and protect our oceans.
And it takes longer to implement these policies because it does require some pretty extensive system-wide changes. But I think policies like California’s SB 54, which aims to reduce 25% of single-use plastics used, that’s really a step in the right direction. And so our policy team is on the front lines of making sure that that bill is fully implemented and that we understand the benefits of that policy by monitoring outcomes and effectiveness of it.
Mitch Ratcliffe 30:56
You mentioned earlier that on the International Coastal Cleanup Day, which is a distributed event all over the world but a day, they collected more than a million plastic bags last year. Is the goal in the long term to no longer need to do those cleanups? Or do you anticipate that we’re always going to be needing to do those cleanups?
Erin Murphy 31:18
Yeah, I think unfortunately, at this point, it’s hard to imagine a world where cleanups aren’t necessary. I think when we did that study in 2020, that was led by Lau et al., it was pretty alarming to see how much we would have to reduce plastic production and how well we would have to manage waste to no longer need cleanups at all, and we really did find that cleanups needed to be an important part of this solution.
And there’s already a lot of legacy plastics in the ocean. So I think as far as we can look forward, cleanups will always be an important part of the suite of solutions that we use.
They’re also really effective for monitoring what’s happening in our ocean. So I mentioned earlier that study that was published in Science that showed that plastic bag bans are effective. We were really excited to see that they actually used Ocean Conservancy International Coastal Cleanup data to do that analysis, and it really just emphasizes the value of citizen science. When you go out and collect data during a cleanup on your beach, we can see what changes occur through time in terms of what debris you’re seeing, and that helps us better understand whether it’s targeted policies or these broader policies, if they’re being effective or not.
Mitch Ratcliffe 32:42
What does the Ocean Conservancy do to help people do citizen science beyond the International Coastal Cleanup?
Erin Murphy 32:49
So that program has been going on for 40 years, and that’s really, in terms of citizen science, our main body of work. But we are interested in having citizens engage in other ways. So we often have — you can sign up for our newsletter and get information about opportunities to call your senators or write your senators or legislators about important ocean issues that are coming up.
And we also just have a lot of educational material so that people can start their own cleanup events, or find cleanup events to participate in, so that individuals can be engaged in being part of the solution.
Mitch Ratcliffe 33:31
You’ve mentioned a couple of items of research that you are beginning to pursue now. But if you had unlimited resources for the remainder of your career, what would you like to investigate and build on those findings with?
Erin Murphy 33:44
Yeah, it’s pretty hard to imagine unlimited resources, especially now, I know. But yeah, you know, we already started working on answering some of these next questions that are remaining for us, and I’m really excited about the work that we’re going to be doing over the next three to five years. And I will not be surprised if, you know, this body of work, trying to understand what’s happening to ocean animals, becomes a career-long question for me.
But in the short term, the things we’re really trying to get at is, first, that entanglement piece, which you mentioned — what is the lethality of plastic entanglement. And we also just launched a working group with scientists from all over the world to take what we have learned about the lethality of plastic ingestion and to build out, include what we are learning right now in our research about entanglement, and then bring in that exposure piece.
So that question you asked earlier about how much plastic is a puffin eating, how often does it have a lethal dose — that’s really what we want to get at. We want to know if we have an idea of what’s in the environment, how likely is that to have population-level effects for species? How likely are they to eat a lethal dose? How likely are they to die? And are we worried about populations because of this?
And right now, governments around the world are really trying to determine how to effectively address plastic pollution, and these sorts of comprehensive risk assessments are really helpful in setting targets. And so that’s really what I want to keep getting at: How can we take everything we know and help decision makers better understand, you know, a reasonable goal? Because a perfect goal is an ocean with no plastic, and I think we have to keep working towards that collectively. But it’s also really important to understand what species are being adversely affected and what we can do to immediately protect them now.
Mitch Ratcliffe 35:46
Well, it’s a multi-generational challenge, and I really applaud the work that you’re doing. How can folks keep up with the work that you’re undertaking?
Erin Murphy 35:55
Yeah, we have a brand new website at oceanconservancy.org, and we have a lot of information there, you know, specifically on what our plastics team is doing, but on what our entire organization is doing in terms of bills that we’re working on. They can also sign up for our newsletter to get information about what the organization is working on, and that will give them ample opportunities to participate in being part of the solution to the plastics crisis.
Mitch Ratcliffe 36:20
Erin, thanks so much for your time today. It’s been a fascinating conversation and an encouraging one.
Erin Murphy 36:26
Thank you. It was great to be here.
[COMMERCIAL BREAK]
Mitch Ratcliffe 36:34
Welcome back to Sustainability In Your Ear. You’ve been listening to my conversation with Dr. Erin Murphy, manager of ocean plastics research at the Ocean Conservancy, and she’s the lead author of the recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that quantifies, for the first time at this scale, how much plastic it takes to kill seabirds, sea turtles, and marine mammals.
You can explore the Ocean Conservancy’s wide-ranging work and sign up for a beach cleanup event at oceanconservancy.org. Ocean Conservancy is all one word, no space, no dash. Oceanconservancy.org.
The numbers Erin and her colleagues reported should stop us in our tracks. The volumes we heard about are disturbing, but imagine — one in five animals had plastic in their gut when they died. For sea turtles, it was one in two. What makes that study especially useful for policymakers is its differentiation by plastic type. Rubber fragments can be targeted because balloons are the deadliest material for seabirds. Soft plastics like bags are the top killer for sea turtles. Ghost fishing gear poses the greatest risk to marine mammals like whales. And each of these findings points to a specific, actionable policy lever: balloon release bans like Florida’s recent legislation, bag bans like California’s, and better gear-marking and recovery programs for the fishing industry.
But the targeted approach is only part of the answer. As Erin emphasized, the total plastic thresholds her team found were low across the board, meaning that every type of plastic poses a threat. “At the end of the day,” she said, “there is too much plastic in the ocean, and we need to do sweeping reforms along the entire plastics life cycle, from production to management to disposal.” That’s a very important quote. Keep it in mind.
A 2020 Ocean Conservancy-backed study quantified what “sweeping” means: a 40% reduction in global plastic production, waste management reaching 98 to 99% effectiveness in its collection and processing of plastic so it doesn’t reach nature, and annual cleanups of the 40% of plastic that still escapes into the environment — and that’s just to return to the 2010 leakage rates.
So that brings us to the elephant in the room — or maybe more to the point, the sperm whale with an entire greenhouse in its stomach — the global plastics treaty negotiations. Which were supposed to deliver a binding international agreement, collapsed in August 2025 in Geneva after oil-producing nations blocked provisions that called for production caps and toxic chemical phase-outs. More than 100 countries in the group known as the High Ambition Coalition were pushing for full life-cycle regulation for plastics, but the requirement that the negotiations reach a consensus gave a handful of petrochemical states an effective veto power. And effective it was.
So between the Busan round in late 2024 and the end of the Geneva talks in 2025, an estimated 7.4 million more metric tons of plastic entered the ocean. The world currently produces more than 460 million metric tons of plastic annually, and only 9% of that is being recycled. Every day, the equivalent of 2,000 garbage trucks of plastic is dumped into our oceans, rivers, and lakes.
However, the collapse of the treaty talks does not mean the end of progress. Erin pointed to evidence that targeted interventions can work. For example, communities in Hawaii conducted large beach cleanups and saw the Hawaiian monk seal population rebound. A study published in Science confirms that bag bans reduce plastic on beaches by between 25 and 47%. California’s SB 54 law aims to cut single-use plastics by 25%. And Ocean Conservancy’s International Coastal Cleanup, which is now in its 40th year, removed more than a million plastic bags from beaches last year. That cleanup data, collected by citizen scientists worldwide, is a research tool providing the time-series evidence that tells us whether policies are working.
So here’s what I want you to leave with from this conversation. Erin’s research focuses exclusively on acute mortality from ingested macroplastics — that’s obstruction, perforation, and torsion of the digestive tract. It does not capture the chronic effects of plastic and chemical exposure or entanglement, which her team will study next. That means the lethal thresholds that she reported likely underestimate the total harm plastic inflicts on marine life.
And the parallel crisis in human health is building from the same source of pollution, which has scattered microscopic shards of plastic across the planet, from the seas to the highest peaks. Most of these microplastics began as macroplastics, like those that are killing puffins and turtles. They break down in the environment into fragments small enough to enter our bloodstream, lungs, liver, and even women’s placentas. As Erin put it, it is all a part of the same crisis.
So one of the most encouraging things that Erin said was also the simplest. When strangers learn about what she studies, they stop and they tell her what they are doing to reduce their plastic footprint. That instinct to environmental stewardship is a real and powerful phenomenon, even if it’s currently being actively suppressed by governments. And the public’s will to protect nature is the foundation that policy, science, and investment will ultimately build on.
The ocean doesn’t need our sympathy. It needs a 40% cut in plastic production, waste systems that actually work, and the political will to treat a binding plastics agreement as a matter of human survival rather than an inconvenience for a few petrochemical companies. Until international negotiations deliver that agreement, the work continues at every other level: state legislatures, coastal cleanups, citizen science, and research programs like Erin’s that give decision makers the evidence-based targets that they’ve been asking for.
So stay tuned, folks, for more conversations about the solutions that can still turn this crisis around. And I hope you’ll take a moment to take a look at any of the more than 540 episodes of Sustainability In Your Ear in our archives. Take the time to share just one of them with your friends or your family. Writing a review on your favorite podcast platform will help your neighbors find us. Folks, you’re the amplifiers that can spread more ideas to create less waste. So please tell your friends, family, and co-workers they can find Sustainability In Your Ear on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Audible, or whatever purveyor of podcast goodness they prefer.
Thank you all for your support. I’m Mitch Ratcliffe. This is Sustainability In Your Ear, and we will be back with another innovator interview soon. In the meantime, take care of yourself, take care of one another, and let’s all take care of this beautiful planet and its oceans. Have a green day.
The post Sustainability In Your Ear: The Ocean Conservancy’s Dr. Erin Murphy Documents the Lethality of Ocean Plastics appeared first on Earth911.
https://earth911.com/podcast/sustainability-in-your-ear-the-ocean-conservancys-dr-erin-murphy-documents-the-lethality-of-ocean-plastics/
The right sustainable rug can completely transform a space. A plant-based fiber rug like jute or sisal can create a grounding warmth, while a thick responsibly-sourced wool rug adds a sense of luxury. An artisan handcrafted rug infuses character and authentic culture where a vintage one can add layers of history and soul.
Furniture is functional and can be beautiful, but adding an exceptional rug is what brings it all together. A rug is at the center — at the heart — of your living room or bedroom or dining room. In other words: a rug is how you start to turn those four walls into a home.
That said, unfortunately most rugs today are mass-produced from synthetic fibers like polyester (read: plastic), finished with toxic chemicals, and made in unethical labor conditions.
Thankfully, there is a better way. Let’s talk sustainable rugs.
What is a “Sustainable Rug”, Exactly?
I like to include an in-depth explanation on “sustainable” in our guides because there’s no standard definition of the term when it comes to fashion or home goods. So here’s how we define “sustainable rugs” at Conscious Life & Style.
Natural Materials:
We’re looking for natural fibers like jute, seagrass, sisal, hemp, cotton (less common) or ethically-sourced wool. Recycled natural fibers are a great bonus, as is organic. The most reputable organic certification for fibers currently on the market is Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS).
We’re steering clear of synthetic rugs, including recycled polyester in this guide, because they risk releasing microplastics into our homes and environment.
Also natural fibers that aren’t treated with or blended with synthetics are generally biodegradable at the end of their life.
“Recyclability” when it comes to textiles is largely a misnomer. We have far more textile waste than we do textile recycling infrastructure capacity. Plus many types of fabrics still can’t be recycled properly — if at all — today.
Dyes & Chemical Usage
Another source of impact is the dyes and other finishes used on the rugs. Many of these dyes and finishes are synthetic.
One better option is a “low impact dye” — this generally refers to a synthetic dye that doesn’t contain common toxic chemicals (like heavy metals) and has a higher absorption rate, which requires less water. Natural dyes on the other hand are non-synthetic colorants derived from plants, minerals, or sometimes even insects.
There are also additional chemicals these companies may add to rugs like PFAS (forever chemicals) for stain or water resistance or flame retardants. So if you see claims like “stain resistant” or “easy care” you probably want to do some additional digging to ensure those textiles weren’t treated with toxic chemicals.
One certification to look for is OEKO-TEX® STANDARD 100, which is a label for textiles that have been tested against common harmful substances.
Ethical Production Practices:
Unfortunately forced and child labor is still happening in the carpet and rug industries. So transparency is key. Two certifications to look for are GoodWeave (assurance against child, forced, and bonded labor) and Fair Trade Certified
. Certifications are certainly not an end all be all, so I’m also looking for transparency from the brand — who makes their products? How are they made? What is their relationship to those makers, artisan cooperatives, or facilities? Are they working in safe conditions? Are they paid fairly? A living wage?
Another element here is craftsmanship. Many of these rug-making techniques have been around centuries, but are at risk of dying out with the rise of mass-produced rug makers. Is the brand showing a commitment to sustaining heritage techniques and generations-old craftsmanship?
You might also like to look for local production, though local doesn’t automatically mean ethical. I still like to look for transparency here, as exposés have found there are still sweatshops in the US, too.
Durability & Longevity:
This one is the most challenging. Not only is it difficult to assess the durability of a rug before you’ve purchased it (even most reviewers only comment on their initial experience), but durability is also significantly impacted by how we care for that rug. Do you wash it often? Do you have pets? Kids? Are you putting the rug in a high-traffic area? Is it getting wet often (like in a kitchen or bathroom)?
That said, I’m looking for attention to craftsmanship from a brand, and attention to detail. There are also certain elements to look out for. For example:
- Thicker and denser rugs generally hold up better than looser or low-density tufted rugs.
- Reinforced edges prevent fraying and strong backings prevent the rug curling at the edges.
- Hand-knotted rugs are labor intensive (and may be pricier) but can last decades or even centuries.
Top Picks for Sustainable Rugs
Ok so that was a lot! But no stress — I’ve done the hours of heavy lifting and digging for you to curate this guide to brands with sustainable rugs. So let’s dive in.
Note that Conscious Life & Style is reader supported and this guide includes affiliate links, which means if you make a purchase via some of these links, I may earn a commission. As always all brands meet are rigorous sustainability criteria.
Secondhand First!
Part of our philosophy at Conscious Life & Style is to look secondhand first. So before we dive into the brands, here are some places to find vintage and pre-loved rugs first:
1. Urban Natural
Best for: Living rooms, dining rooms and bedrooms
Urban Natural is your online destination for finding responsibly-made, exceptionally crafted home goods from sustainably-minded makers. Brands on Urban Natural include Loloi, a well-respected GoodWeave certified rug brand with rugs ethically hand-woven in Varanasi, India; and Jaipur Living, a company dedicated to preserving time-honored handcrafted art and rug weaving traditions, partnering with 40,000 artisans across hundreds of rural communities throughout India.
Other sustainable rug options on Urban Natural include 100% linen rugs from Libeco, which holds the Masters of Linen® quality label; and 100% wool rugs made in the USA from Earth Weave, the first US carpet manufacturer with a completely natural product line.
Materials: Wool, Jute, Sisal, Cotton, Silk, and Linen (Note: there are a couple of “performance” rugs made with polyester)
Price Range: Starts at $179
Shipping: Ships within the US
2. Lorena Canals
Best for: Living rooms, entryways and bedrooms
Lorena Canals revolutionized the rug industry with machine-washable cotton and wool rugs that don’t compromise on beauty or sustainability. Handcrafted in the brand’s own factory in India since 1998, each piece uses natural or recycled fibers, non-toxic azo-free dyes certified by GOTS and OEKO-TEX standards, and a water-efficient cone-dyeing method that conserves 75% of water compared to traditional processes. The aesthetic ranges from playful geometric patterns and kitchen tile motifs to minimalist neutral textures in their Woolable collection. With customizable options and designs that celebrate the natural colors of undyed wool, these rugs pair practical washability with artisan craftsmanship, all while supporting the brand’s Sakûla Project school for children in northern India.
Materials: Cotton, Wool
Price Range: From $145
Shipping: Global | Outside of US and Canada? Use this website to order instead.
3. CICIL
Best for: Living rooms, bedrooms, hallways, and dining rooms
Founded by two former Patagonia textile experts in North Carolina, Cicil brings radical transparency to rug-making with a supply chain that travels less than 1,000 miles from wool to floor. Their braided and shuttle weave rugs use 70% undyed wool sourced directly from small family farms across upstate New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont, combined with 30% jute for durability. With shapes ranging from linear and oval to curvy and arch designs, each piece celebrates natural wool tones—from deep grays to warm beiges—without any synthetic dyes or finishes. Made in the Carolinas using traditional techniques on vintage looms, Cicil’s approach is intentionally “anti-innovation,” focusing instead on time-tested methods that create rugs built to biodegrade gracefully after a lifetime of use.
Materials: Wool, Jute
Price Point: From $459
Shipping: Ships within the US (all orders ship free)
4. West Elm Fair Trade Certified
Best for: Living rooms, dining rooms, offices, or bedrooms
I tend to put large retailers, like West Elm, through much stricter scrutiny in my vetting process because they have larger supply chains which makes transparency much more difficult. It’s easy to know your factory without a certification if you work with one or two facilities. It’s much harder when you work with 20 — or 200. That’s why I appreciate that West Elm has such an extensive selection of rugs made in verified Fair Trade Certified factories.
Most of West Elm’s rugs are also made from 100% natural materials like sisal, jute, wool, and cotton. Though like most companies, their “Performance Rugs” are made with polyester. West Elm does use 90-100% recycled polyester for these rugs which makes it a lower impact choice from a carbon emissions point of view. It may still shed microplastics, but if you have pets that could be worth the trade-off for you to have a durable rug.
Note that West Elm does not have non-toxic related certifications for most of their rugs, so this can be a great choice if you value aesthetic variety, ethical production, and natural materials, but if your top priority or concern is that the rug was tested for potentially harmful chemicals, West Elm might not be the right fit for you.
Materials: Wool, Jute, Sisal, Cotton (Performance rugs use recycled polyester)
Price Point: From $459
Shipping: Ships within the US and select other countries
5. Schoolhouse
Best for: Bedrooms, living rooms, and dining rooms
Schoolhouse brings American design sensibility to handcrafted rugs woven in India using natural materials. Their collection spans hand-knotted wool pieces with vivid, whimsical patterns like the Sundrop design to reversible flatweave plaid styles perfect for layering. Natural-dyed wool yarn creates rich, enduring colors—from burnt orange and chartreuse to soft neutrals—while jute-chenille blends offer versatility underfoot without the typical scratchiness. With 80% of their assortment domestic and FSC-certified materials across their product lines, Schoolhouse prioritizes reducing carbon emissions through consolidated shipping and minimal plastic packaging.
Materials: Wool, Jute, Cotton, Recycled PET (note: PET is plastic, so this isn’t our top recommendation)
Price Range: From $79
Shipping: Ships to all US States and Canada
6. Nestig
Best for: Nurseries and playrooms
Nestig transforms nursery floors with whimsical, machine-washable rugs that parents actually want to clean. Hand-loomed in Brazil by local artisans with over 20 years of experience, each piece uses 100% GOTS-certified organic cotton grown locally and dyed with non-toxic pigments. The designs range from playful vehicles (dump trucks, airplanes, sailboats) and animals (dinosaurs, bears) to sophisticated geometric patterns and world maps. Nestig operates on a “just enough” business model that minimizes warehouse inventory and carbon footprint, partnering exclusively with sustainable, family-owned businesses. Every rug arrives as a truly one-of-a-kind piece with natural variations that come from artisan craftsmanship.
Materials: Organic Cotton
Price Range: From $399
Shipping: Ships to US, Canada, and the UK
7. Salem Hello
Best for: Living rooms, bedrooms, hallways and statement spaces
Salam Hello bridges the gap between Moroccan artisan tradition and contemporary homes with transparency at its core. Each handwoven rug is crafted by Amazigh women in Morocco’s Atlas Mountains, preserving techniques passed through generations while ensuring fair wages and artisan recognition. The collection includes ready-to-ship vintage and new pieces alongside made-to-order designs where you choose size, color, and pattern. From neutral flatweaves and textured hand-knots to bold geometric designs rich in traditional symbolism, every rug carries protective meaning woven into its fibers. With collaborations like their Izra collection with General Assembly and the Atlas Form line, Salam Hello offers refined modern interpretations alongside authentic traditional styles.
Materials: Wool
Price: From $625
Shipping: Ships Worldwide
8. Organic Weave
Best for: Living rooms, bedrooms, and kids’ rooms
Organic Weave was born after founder Linda witnessed child labor at the rug manufacturers in India her family’s rug business was sourcing from. When Linda became the buyer at her family’s company, she started sourcing exclusively from the only supplier that was committed to not employing children.
Today, Organic Weave is GoodWeave certified — a certification providing additional assurance there isn’t child labor in the supply chain. And as the name suggests, the sustainable rug company also uses organic materials: 100% organic wool for high-traffic areas like living rooms and 100% organic cotton for lower traffic areas like bedrooms. Their handmade, artisan crafted rugs are Global Organic Textile Standard Certified too.
Materials: Organic Cotton, Organic Wool
Price Range: From $1,789
Shipping: Ships Worldwide
9. LOOMY
Best for: Living rooms, bedrooms, and dining rooms
LOOMY proves that sustainable doesn’t mean sacrificing style with a curated collection of contemporary rugs made entirely by hand from indigenous artisan weaving communities worldwide. Their natural fiber collection includes wool, jute, cotton, hemp, and sisal rugs alongside performance options crafted from recycled P.E.T. plastic diverted from oceans and landfills. From shaggy textures and bold geometric patterns to minimalist flatweaves, every design is exclusively created in-house and made without mechanical assistance, using traditional spinning, natural dye baths under the sun, and generations-old loom techniques. The brand’s transparency extends to sharing exactly who made each rug, how many hours it took, and the sustainable materials used.
Materials: Wool, Jute, Cotton, Hemp, Sisal, Recycled P.E.T.
Price Range: From $278
Shipping: Ships to all US States and Canada
10. Revival
Best for: Living rooms, bedrooms, and dining rooms
Originally founded as a vintage rug curator, Revival now makes a wide range of affordable, beautiful rugs for all needs, whether you have kids, pets, or just want an easy-care washable rug.
Not all options from Revival are sustainable, and some are made from virgin polyester, so for natural fibers I’d direct you to their Wool Rugs collection and Jute Rugs collection, including their naturally dyed jute rugs. Revival also carries one-of-a-kind rugs, which include vintage options.
Materials: Wool, Jute, Recycled Polyester (also has some rugs made with new polyester, which I’d avoid)
Price Range: From $169
Shipping: Ships to contiguous US and selected other international destinations
Honorable Mentions: More Sustainable Rug Options
Here are some additional companies with sustainable rugs to check out! These didn’t make the “top 10” list based on our criteria, but you might have different priorities. So if you’re not finding what you’re looking for above, I recommend taking a look at this list too.
Hook and Loom: if you’re looking for a non-toxic organic rug, Hook and Loom has undyed organic cotton and natural wool rugs made without added chemicals. Their website doesn’t have the most modern user experience, which can make shopping a bit more cumbersome, but the brand has thousands of positive reviews.
Sabai: Sabai’s all-natural textured rugs are crafted from jute and wool in North Carolina by skilled rug makers. They are one of the few companies to manufacture their rugs in the US. That said, the rug does appear to be on the thinner side considering the price point.
The Citizenry: Hand-knotted and hand-loomed by artisan partners across the globe from Morocco to Peru each piece blends modern minimalist design with time-tested techniques passed down through generations. The Citizenry’s collection features everything from plush, textured wool designs to natural jute pieces, and the retailer guarantees 100% fair trade standards on every product, partnering directly with artisan communities. However, many customers complain online about slow shipping and poor customer service, so that’s something to keep in mind before purchasing.
Yaya & Co: this brand has some high sustainability standards like 100% organic certified materials and production in a Fair Trade Certified family-owned factory! Their designs are quite colorful and fun too, which isn’t always easy to find with organic materials. Their selection is more limited compared to the other brands and retailers, which is the only reason they didn’t make it onto the top 10 list.
The post 10 Best Sustainable Rugs For a Healthier Home and Planet appeared first on Conscious Life & Style.
Just like fashion has been overrun by fast fashion, home goods and furniture have similarly seen a rapid decline in quality. Rugs are no exception.
And similar to fashion, these cheap goods come at a high cost — namely, to the planet and to people. In fact carpet and rug production is rampant with exploitation.
On the other hand, fair trade rugs present the best of what a rug can bring to your home: artistry, craftsmanship, and heritage.
The brands featured in this guide are partnering with (and fairly paying!) skilled artisans who are using generations-old — and sometimes even centuries-old — techniques. These artisans are sustaining long lines of crafts, preserving their cultural diversity, and celebrating the richness of their time-honored crafts.
There’s simply no replacement for a timeless, quality artisan-made rug — they’re like pieces of art you can lay out on your floor or hang on your walls.
So, enjoy browsing through this guide to sustainable rug brands listed out below and best of luck on your search for the right fair trade rug!
Where to Find Ethical and Fair Trade Rugs
Note that this guide includes affiliates and partners. As always, brands must meet high standards for ethics and sustainability to be featured and all opinions are my own.
1. The Citizenry
If you’re browsing for fair trade rugs, but looking for a more minimalist or neutral aesthetic, look no further than The Citizenry.
The brand’s natural, handmade rugs — made by artisans working in fair trade conditions — feature striking prints but more subtle colors. Next to each product page you’ll be able to learn more about the workshop and the artisans behind that piece.
Price Range: $$$
Conscious Qualities: Fair Trade, Natural Fibers, Craft Preservation
Categories: Area Rugs
2. Kiliim
If you’re well-versed in rug terminology, you may recognize that this brand’s name looks similar to the word kilim. Kiliim’s rug are made using authentic, well, kilim rug craftsmanship by artisans in Egypt coming from generations of kilim artisans. To ensure ethical production and to support the preservation of this heritage craft, Kiliim pays living wages to all artisans.
Price Range: $ – $$$
Conscious Qualities: Ethical Production, Heritage Craft Preservation, Natural Fibers
Categories: Area Rugs, Accent Rugs
3. Urban Natural
This natural home and lifestyle retailer has a beautifully curated selection of sustainably-made rugs crafted with materials like jute, sisal, wool, and cotton.
Several brands on Urban Natural are also ethically hand-loomed or hand-knotted, such as Loloi — a GoodWeave partner — and Jaipur Living — a brand that partners with thousands of local artisans to sustain heritage crafts.
Price Range: $$+
Conscious Qualities: Eco-Conscious Materials
Categories: Outdoor, Area Rugs, and Accent Rugs
4. Zuahaza
Each of Zuahaza’s artisan-made rugs is creatively designed with unique patterns and expertly handwoven by weavers in Colombia. Zuahaza’s captivating rugs are made from sustainably-sourced fique, a natural fiber from Colombia that is similar to hemp. And, just like hemp, fique requires little water to grow and is rarely attacked by pests (meaning fique is always grown organically without chemical pesticides).
Price Range: $$ – $$$
Conscious Qualities: Organic Fibers & Natural Dyes, Cultural Preservation, BIPOC-Owned
Categories: Area Rugs, Runner Rugs, Accent Rugs
5. LOOMY
Founded by a weaver, LOOMY is dedicated to making beautiful, non-toxic rugs that will last for decades to come.
LOOMY partners with highly-skilled artisan weavers who craft quality rugs made from eco-minded materials like banana silk, jute, and recycled cotton built to withstand whatever life brings you.
Price Range: $$ – $$$
Conscious Qualities: Eco & Non-Toxic Materials, Craft Preservation
Categories: Area Rugs, Accent Rugs, Runners, Outdoor Rugs
6. Leah Singh
Leah Singh’s designs are a reflection of the designer’s background, growing up surrounded by the rich artistry of India and studying at Parsons amidst the structural, minimal lines of New York.
All of the brand’s rugs are made by artisans in India who use embroidery, weaving, and printing techniques native to their respective regions.
Price Range: $$ – $$$
Conscious Qualities: BIPOC-Owned, Ethical Production, Cultural Preservation
Categories: Area Rugs, Accent Rugs, Runners
7. West Elm
West Elm is bringing ethical rugs to a broader market with their collection of Fair Trade Certified
wool and cotton rugs. While I recommend browsing the smaller shops listed above first, West Elm is supporting the movement to responsibly-made, fair trade rugs.
Price Range: $$$
Conscious Qualities: Fair Trade production, Majority Natural Materials
Categories: Area Rugs, Accent Rugs
Liked this guide to sustainable rugs? You might also enjoy:
Ethical Home Decor Brands to Curate a Beautiful, Conscious Space
Eco-Friendly Furniture to Furnish Your Home Sustainably
Fair Trade and Eco-Friendly Blankets to Cozy Up With
The post 7 Best Ethical Fair Trade Rugs to Elevate Your Space appeared first on Conscious Life & Style.
A durable set of eco-friendly dinnerware is a solid ingredient for a sustainably set table! But…
What is Sustainable Dinnerware?
Well looking for secondhand and vintage dinnerware is always a good start, whether that’s your grandmother’s porcelain dining sets or a pre-loved set of colorful plates and bowls at your local thrift store.
Another great place to look is estate sales. You can likely find full sets of dinnerware! If none of those options are available to you (or your just not finding something you love) you can check out a site like Etsy Used or Chairish.
*Important note on secondhand dinnerware: the FDA started regulating the use of lead in dinnerware in 1971. So you might want to avoid any dinnerware produced before 1971, unless it’s just for display!
Here are some qualities to look for when shopping for new sustainable dinnerware:
Sustainably sourced materials: such as responsibly-harvested bamboo and recycled glass.
Quality: when it comes to products you’re going to potentially use and wash daily, durability is an important factor to keep in mind. Also consider your lifestyle! Perhaps glass and porcelain aren’t the best choices if you have little ones, or you tend to drop things often. (Guilty!!)
Usefulness: You might also want to consider if you will be hand-washing or dishwashing your dinnerware. Some materials are too fragile for the dishwasher, so consider if you’ll have the time (and willingness) to hand wash them all the time. Because part of sustainability is that you’ll actually use the products and they won’t just sit and collect dust! 
Ethical production: this could look like transparent local manufacturing or artisan-made and fair trade. In any case, an ethical dinnerware brand would prioritize fair living wages for the workers, ensure safe healthy conditions (this includes no toxic chemicals used in production!) and go above and beyond to consider the wellbeing of the people who work for them and/or produce their products.
Ownership and Equity: this means looking at who owns and profits from the brands we’re supporting; if a brand is owned by a person of color, it will be indicated in their description below (BIPOC-owned stands for Black, Indigenous, Person of Color-owned and WOC-owned stands for Woman of Color-owned).
Your Values: you may have other elements you look for in a brand, such as traditional craft preservation. Or perhaps it’s really important to you that a brand is giving back to their local community.
Where to Find Eco-Friendly Dinnerware
The eco-friendly tableware and sustainable dinnerware brands featured below meet at least one (though most of them meet several) of the above criteria.
In this roundup, you’ll find sustainable pottery (including ceramic plates, sustainable mugs, and more), recycled glassware, artisan-made ethical dinnerware, and everything in between to suit your needs. I hope that this variety of brands will help you set the table, whether that’s for fancy dinner parties, Friday night pizza, or something in between.
This article features affiliates and partners. As always, we only feature brands that meet strict standards for sustainability that we love — and that we think you’ll love too!
1. East Fork
East Fork’s ethically-made dinnerware and tableware is next level — their gorgeous sustainable ceramics, glassware, mugs, and other goods are exquisitely designed and built for durability.
Committed to creating local manufacturing jobs, all of East Fork’s eco-friendly pottery is made in Asheville, North Carolina and is working to center equity and inclusion throughout their business.
Categories: Plates, Bowls, Cups, Drinking Glasses, Flatware/Silverware,
Conscious Qualities: Locally-Made, Transparent Production
Price Range: $$$
2. Our Place
From the same brand that brought us their cult-favorite Always Pan, comes a gorgeous collection of non-toxic dinnerware and sustainable pottery.
Our Place has hand-painted main plates and side bowls made with recycled and virgin porcelain ceramic and dinner glasses handmade from recycled glass and colored with natural dyes.
Categories: Glassware, Bowls, Plates
Conscious Qualities: Eco Materials, Gives Back, WOC-Owned
Price Range: $$
3. Fable
Prioritizing timelessness and sustainability, Fable sources quality materials and simple designs that last the test of time.
The eco-minded dinnerware company partners with makers in Portugal, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the US that use conscious practices, like ethical employment, craftsmanship, and low-waste practices (like sourcing recycled clay).
Categories: Dinnerware, Drinkware, Cutlery, Serveware, and Decor
Conscious Qualities: Quality Craftsmanship, Low Waste Practices, Responsibly Sourced
Price Range: $$$
4. Zungleboo
Lightweight, shatterproof, and made from corn starch + bamboo fiber, Zungleboo creates family-friendly and eco-friendly dinnerware!
Their versatile plant-based bowls and plates are also dishwasher and microwave safe, making them easy to care for no matter how busy mealtime is. As Zungleboo writes on their website, their sustainable dinnerware is “from real plants, for real life”.
Categories: Bowls, Plates
Conscious Qualities: Eco Materials, WOC-Owned
Price Range: $$
Use code CONSCIOUS15 for 15% off!
5. Urban Natural
Green home retailer Urban Natural has stunning eco-friendly tabletop goods from leading contemporary brands like Farmhouse Pottery and Ethnicraft.
The brands Urban Natural curates source natural materials, use time-honored processes, and take quality craftsmanship seriously.
Categories: Plates, Bowls, Cups & Mugs, Flatware
Conscious Qualities: Artisan Goods, Natural Materials, Locally and Ethically Made
Price Range: $$ – $$$
6. GOODEE
For artisanal plates that can elevate your tablescape, GOODEE is the answer.
From 100% porcelain stone ceramic plates hand-crafted in the ancient Japanese town of Arita and hand-painted plates made from Egyptian clay to marble patterned ecothylene® (upcycled BPA-free plastic) plates ideal for family-friendly daily wares, GOODEE has options for everyone.
Categories: Plates, Glassware, Cups & Mugs, Serving, Flatware
Conscious Qualities: Ethical Production, Craft Preservation
Price Range: $$$
7. Ekobo
Ekobo’s colorful eco-friendly dinnerware is available in a variety of colors and sizes, perfect for mixing and matching to create a unique sustainable table setting for any space.
The eco-friendly dinnerware from Ekobo is made from upcycled bamboo and the result is durable, dishwasher-safe, and non-toxic diningware.
Categories: Plates, Bowls, Cups, Trays, Baby Diningware
Conscious Qualities: Eco Materials
Price Range: $$
More Guides For An Eco-Friendly Kitchen:
Best Fair Trade and Eco-Friendly Tablecloths
Your Sustainable and Zero Waste Kitchen Guide
The Best Zero Waste Food Storage Options
The post 7 Eco-Friendly Dinnerware Brands To Set Your Sustainable Table appeared first on Conscious Life & Style.
7 Eco-Friendly Dinnerware Brands To Set Your Sustainable Table
-
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 Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
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”
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits