Inside Ocean Conservancy's Fight to Make Washing Machine Filters the Law

0:00Right now, in houses all over the world, washing machines are running. Every single cycle releases thousands of plastic fibers too small to see. Head is straight into rivers, the oceans, and eventually back to us. Now the fix already exists. And this is a story about whether anyone can actually force that fix into law, a fight that's already been fought once, lost, and is still being fought again right now as we speak. We're going to be talking about that on today's episode of the How to Protect the Ocean podcast. I'm your host, Andrew Lewin. If you're new here and you like this type of information on how you can protect the ocean better, I highly suggest to follow this podcast on your favorite podcast app. Tell your friends, tell your family members, people who want to know how they can stop plastic fibers from getting into, and microfibers from getting into our oceans. Now these microfibers come off synthetic clothing every time it's washed, right?

1:01And there's a filter for to catch those microfibers. Similar in concept to a dryers lin trap, like how you have to take that out every once in a while, all the lin because you don't want to go on. I always worry that it's going to go on to catch on fire. And it can catch most of it before it even leaves your house. Now getting that filter built into washing machines as a standard equipment is the real challenge, just like you would for a lint, the lint catcher. The same way seat belt eventually became standard in cars as well. So right now it's required nowhere in the world in any meaningful and forced way. And if you listen to any of the other podcasts where we talked about this, you know that France tried to implement it, but it hasn't really been implemented. We're going to talk about the government of California and why the governor actually said no and vetoed the law. Now ocean conservaties campaign not safe for wash is built as a deliberate strategy around one fact. The technology already works. It's there. It exists. There's multiple different types of filters that you can get.

2:02And the campaign's job is turning public opinion into political pressure for one specific ask, requiring the filter on new machines that are built and that you can buy. So you don't have to go out and buy the filter. It's already there. A poll ocean conservatist he ran in May, 2026 of just over 1,000 Americans found concern about microplastics up 32% since 2023. Nearly nine and 10 people concern and 81% in favor of requiring filters on new washing machines. So like this is something that's interesting because we, you know, they're out of the people who follow ocean conservancy and who are doing this poll, they're concerned. So the action of the campaign is getting to the people. The awareness campaign is working. People are understanding that micro fibers are bad. People are understanding that we need to do something about it. Now you can go out right now and you can buy filters. For your washing machine and you can install it on. I don't know how difficult I don't have one myself. I don't know how difficult it is to put one on, right?

3:03But you can go out and buy one. So you can do this on your own right now if you want. But the fight to convince like people like this is a problem is already been won already. We don't have to worry about that. The real obstacle sits somewhere else entirely. The AGM, AAM, is short for the association of home appliance manufacturers. The trade group representing the companies that actually manufacture washing machines is the real opponent of this story. Their case comes from testing with NSF International, company that I guess that does test products on two specific products. Now they came out with the result. They're saying, hey, look, there's only, these filters only catch like 25%. They're not actually doing that great a job. Ocean Conservancy says that it catches up to 90% in some cases of these micro fibers. That's a real difference here. Now the tests that they did that the AGM did with, I'm gonna call it AAM, did with NSF International. They did look like two specific products.

4:05So one was the Filtral 160, a washing machine microfiber filter with a 20 micron mesh. And the other was a Hayward Pool Filter canister fitted with pool filter socks, a product built for swimming pools. Tested here as a stand in for a laundry filter. So they're not really testing the variety of filters. They're testing one actual washing machine microfiber filter and another one which is a pool filter, which probably won't work. Now the results in their own words, the filters capture about most 26% of the material. And only a portion of that material that they caught would actually be microfibers. The number represents like the total material caught without confirming how much of it was actually microfibers. Maybe you think it's less, maybe we don't, I don't know. Now as I mentioned, Ocean Conservancy's number is 90%. And has its own little gap to be all transparent for the research that I find. I don't know where they pulled the 90% from. I don't know if it's a specific study.

5:06I could not find it, but I did find a bunch of other testing. And so independent testing outside either organization tells a clear story. One independent study found that Lint LUVR, Lint LUVR, external filter captures 87% of fibers on average. Planet care claims up to 98%. And guppies, friends, mesh bag claims 79% to 86%. The Corribal reduces shedding by roughly 26% to 31%. I think that goes into the wash as you wash your clothes. An independent government review out of Connecticut found existing washing machine filters remove 80% to 89% of micro fibers like overall. So although the neither organizations numbers are like, within those range that they talk about, Ocean Conservancy's the number of 90%. It sits pretty comfortably inside that range of that independent product testing, especially when they tested a bunch of different products

6:06and not pool filter, right? So I think that helps when it looks at the legitimacy of that 90%. We know these micro fibers will catch microfiber. The microfiber filters will catch microfibers, right? Now one part of the appliance industry's case does hold up though, a separate filter effectiveness study avoided using detergent during testing specifically because of concerns it would cause clogging. And yesterday's show I mentioned that the clogging of these microfibers when they go and water to plants they can often get cut up with the biosolids. And they were worried about this happening there. Now I don't know if there's testing that has it with and without detergent, but this is something that is I guess a concern when they look at it. But when you're washing your clothes, you gotta wash it with detergent. So that actually matters in this respect. So I don't really know what the number was off that study, but it did say that there was concern with the detergent clogging up the microfibers within this.

7:07But you would think that detergent would just be solvent within the washer. I don't know, I'm not an engineer in that kind of way, but you know, you'd think that would be common sense. But we'll see. Now there's also a life cycle argument, right? It claims it takes roughly 13 years, longer than a washing machine's working life these days for a filter to capture as much plastic as it took to manufacture it. And they warned about clogging, flooding risks and burden on people with disabilities who'd have to maintain these filters. So these are different sort of concerns that go around. I haven't read up on the filters if they address those concerns. But there's obviously some controversy here. There's two different organizations with very different numbers. The Orchard Conservancy kind of seems right with those numbers, but there's also some other things that you have to look out for. Even there was also like a commercial washing machine manufacturer or business owner who was worried about it like where the coin washing machines. They said they use a different type of washer

8:08where you can't add a filter. It's a drain that goes down the bottom. They wouldn't be able to use it in those commercial ones. But this campaign that the Orchard Conservancy is running, not safe for wash is for residential and not commercial. That could be addressed in another time, I guess. Now let's talk. So we talk about, you know, Orchard Conservancy wants this bill passed and they want to have government make sure that it's legislated that these manufacturers have to put these filters on. These microfilters on, right? So how do we get this passed? Has it been tried? Where is it all coming from? California passed a bill through its state legislature in 2023. And it reached the governor's desk. Now the governor knew some vetoed it, citing rising costs to consumers, but his actual veto letter never named a number like our study or source. He simply just asserted that the concern and called for more research first. Now, Ocean Conservancy's own economic analysis put the costs of a built in filter

9:10at about $14 to $20 per machine. And a retrofit filter installed after the fact runs culture to about $100 to $300. A gap that comes down to comparing like the factory installed part against the aftermarket add on. So if these are legislated to be built as these washing machines are being built, then you would think it would be the cheaper version. Of course, the consumer would probably take the cost, but it would be interesting to see what would happen. So Newsom's own administration had previously endorsed this exact filter approach in California's own statewide microplastic strategy, which makes this veto read as a reversal of the administration's own prior position. It's kind of funny, right? Like you see that the California said, oh yeah, we're gonna put this in our strategy and then all of a sudden they come in and they don't put it in. So you wonder if maybe it's just Governor Newsom just didn't look at this strategy or his advisors didn't tell him about this strategy and they forgot. They were coming out of COVID and they're worried about costs of for everybody. Who knows what they were worried about? I would imagine it would have taken a while before these microfilters would be put on

10:12and assembled and put together and approved, but that's where we are with the government of California. Now as I mentioned yesterday, France became the first country in the world to pass this law and it's still unenforced because the technical rules needed to make the law were never really finished. And the AHAM points to both California and France as evidence that the policy doesn't work. The bills both passed and the list, people want them. This is not a matter of people don't want them, but it's just a matter of like it's not going through because of specific individuals. So we wonder what's happening. Now around the US, there are five states that are actually putting bills through or have bills through or have tried to put bills through. So New York and Illinois, both have real bills moving right now. New York comes from Assemblywoman Anna Kills. The Kills I think is how you pronounce it. And Illinois has companion bills in both its house and senate. Oregon already tried once a 2025 bill died in committee and a renewed push in 2020, six doesn't have enough support yet to move it.

11:14New Jersey and Pennsylvania both have bills reported as in progress, but those are not necessarily being put through full confidence. And obviously California, we already know that the new some vetoed it. And then a federal bill called the Fighting Fibers Act is sitting in the Senate committee room right now, waiting on its second attempt after an earlier version died in the previous Congress. So there's still a lot to go through. I don't know if there's anything environmental that's gonna happen with this federal administration. I assume that there's more in the states that we could, in the US states that can happen, same with provinces, maybe even in Canada, I would like to see a bill go through. I don't know if I don't think it's required here in Canada, so it's always good to know. But to be honest, nobody really knows how this campaign is gonna end. Ocean Conservancy doesn't give up. They are always great at doing that. They are going to fight this and they are going to ensure that all concerns are addressed and they can be properly laid out so that more and more people can take part in this campaign and talk to your local representative, your state,

12:16your federal and your local representative, whether you're in the states, whether you're in Canada, where are you listening to this? This is like an important part. This can really help reduce microfiber, microfiber from being released into the water system and then, of course, back into us, by up to 90%, that's huge, that's a huge, huge thing. So that's the episode for today. If you wanna find out more, you can go to oceanconservancy.org, slash NSFW, contact your representatives, find out what's moving in your own state. And of course, I think that's always fun. And the same playbook works locally, wherever you are, since the exact fight is playing out in other countries too, so it doesn't matter where you are. Now, next episode, we are gonna talk about who actually pays for all this and the economics behind laws like California's SB-54, and who puts the bill for cleaning up plastic pollution today? That's on tomorrow's episode. So don't miss out, hit that follow button, and thank you so much for joining me.

13:16If you wanna get in contact with questions or concerns, let me know, I am available, just DM me, my links to my socials are down below. LinkedIn is probably the best way these days to get on, I'm always on it. Or Instagram or TikTok or Facebook, whichever one you want. But of course, don't forget to tune in tomorrow. Thank you so much for joining me on today's episode of the How to Protect the Ocean podcast. I'm your host, Andrew Lewin. Have a great day. We'll talk to you next time and happy conservation.