Paint and Microplastics: New Research Highlights a Major but Overlooked Pollution Source

Scientific review identifies paint as a widespread and underestimated contributor to microplastic pollution

A newly published scientific review is putting paint microplastics firmly on the environmental agenda. In the paper “Paint: a ubiquitous yet disregarded piece of the microplastics puzzle,” published in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry in January 2025, researchers conclude that paint-derived microplastics are widespread, likely important, and still far too often overlooked in both research and environmental discussions.

A Comprehensive Scientific Review

The review, led by researchers at the University of Toronto, systematically examined 53 relevant scientific articles on paint microplastic sources, identification methods, environmental concentrations, and toxicological effects. The authors’ core message is clear: paint is not a marginal issue in the microplastics debate. It is a significant and under-recognized one.

Paint Is Everywhere - And So Are Its Particles

What makes the article especially important is that it shifts the conversation away from the usual focus on packaging waste and toward the built environment. According to the review, paint microplastics can originate from buildings and murals, crafts and hobbies, cars and roads, boats and marine structures, and industrial systems such as pipes, sewers, and other infrastructure. In other words, paint sheds particles across a wide range of everyday and industrial uses.

Measurable Environmental Concentrations

The paper also shows that these particles are already being found in the environment at concerning levels. The authors report measured concentrations of up to 290,000 paint particles per kilogram of sediment, with the highest concentration reported near a graffiti wall. Existing environmental measurements have so far been concentrated mainly in Europe and, to a lesser extent, East Asia, which also suggests that the global picture is still incomplete. 

One of the article’s most striking examples comes from Germany. A study cited in the review estimated that 15 leisure boat facilities in the Warnow estuary emit 370 million antifouling paint particles per year during use, high-pressure washing, and maintenance or repair. Another study cited by the authors found that paint microplastics from household products contributed to an average concentration of 2.7 µg/L in Dutch sewage-treatment plant effluents, with model estimates ranging from 0.2 to 66 µg/L.

Underestimated Due to Detection Challenges

The review also underlines that science may still be undercounting the problem. The authors note that paint microplastics are often smaller and denser than many other plastic particles, which means standard microplastic sampling and separation methods can miss them. They explicitly warn that methodological limitations and low recognition of paint as a plastic source have restricted robust estimates of environmental concentrations. 

Toxicological Concerns and Knowledge Gaps

On toxicity, the paper does not claim that every paint particle causes the same harm, but it does show enough evidence to justify concern. Across the toxicology literature reviewed, the authors identified 68 tested effects and 17 LC50 values, ranging from 0.001 to 20 g/L. In 66% of the tested effects, the paint treatment produced a statistically significant difference compared with controls, although the paper notes that many of these studies focused on antifouling paints.

Just as importantly, the researchers emphasise how many gaps remain. They found only 38 studies quantifying paint microplastics in environmental matrices, and they highlight major geographic gaps, including limited data from North America, South America, South Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, Central America, and the Middle East. They also note that freshwater systems are underrepresented and that studies on organisms, including humans, remain sparse.

Why This Matters for the Paint Industry

For the professional paint sector, the message is not that every source is identical, but that everyday handling of paint deserves greater attention. The review specifically identifies maintenance, high-pressure washing, sanding, scraping, and wastewater-related pathways as routes by which paint particles reach the environment. That makes prevention at source increasingly important.

From Research to Practical Solutions

This is where practical solutions matter. Lavabrush is designed to reduce the amount of paint residue washed away during brush cleaning by using a closed cleaning process with dramatically lower water use than conventional rinsing.

The Oxford paper does not evaluate Lavabrush or quantify brush-cleaning as a standalone global source, so any responsible reading should stop short of claiming that tool cleaning is the dominant pathway. But the research does strengthen the broader case for technologies that help prevent paint residues from entering wastewater in the first place. 

A Missing Piece of the Microplastics Puzzle

The new review does not present paint as a side issue. It presents it as a missing piece of the microplastics puzzle. For the industry, that is both a warning and an opportunity: a warning that paint-related pollution can no longer be ignored, and an opportunity to adopt smarter routines and technologies that reduce emissions before they reach waterways.