Plastics: Past, Present…and Future

Historically, humans have been using natural polymers, such as rubber derived from the sap of Hevea brasiliensis, Shellac, a resin secreted by the lac bug, and Gutta-percha, a rubber-like material derived from trees native to Southeast Asia, for a long time. The first synthetic plastic dates back to the mid-19^th century, when the first synthetic plastic, Parkesine, was developed from cellulose by Alexander Parkes in 1862, marking the beginning of man-made polymers. In 1907, Belgian chemist Leo Baekeland created Bakelite, the first fully synthetic plastic, which revolutionized industries due to its heat resistance and electrical insulating properties. Fast forward to the 20^th century, rapid advancements with the invention of polyethylene in the 1930s and nylon in 1935, brought plastic into our daily lives. During World War II, plastic production was ramped up to meet demands from the defense industry. In the post-war consumer culture, using technological innovations and advanced synthesis methods to create and manipulate isomers, synthetic polymers became an integral part of our daily existence. Since then, global plastic production has increased exponentially, and current production is over 502.5 million tons (MT) worldwide. At this trajectory and barring any binding treaty to limit plastic production, the number is on track to more than double by 2050.

Military use of plastics began with Bakelite appearing in World War I for durable electrical insulators, switchgear, and radio components, alongside cellulose acetate and nitrate coatings for aircraft fabrics and protective eyewear. World War II accelerated adoption, when nylon replaced silk in parachutes and cords; polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) became standard for aircraft canopies and submarine periscopes; polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polyethylene insulated wiring and cables; phenolic laminates formed robust helmet liners; and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) provided corrosion‑resistant seals crucial to wartime nuclear work. During the Cold War, fiberglass-epoxy composites enabled radomes, fairings, and non-magnetic glass-reinforced plastic hulls for minesweepers, while plastics transformed packaging, field gear, and transparent armor through polycarbonate laminates. From the 1970s onward, aramid fibers and later ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) delivered lighter ballistic helmets, vests, and armor panels, complemented by polymer-bonded explosives and radar-absorbent polymer composites for stealth. Currently, advanced polymers permeate military systems — from lightweight unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) airframes and ruggedized electronics housings to polymer magazines and ongoing trials of polymer‑cased ammunition — reflecting a century‑long shift toward lighter, corrosion‑resistant, and multifunctional materials.

With increasing applications of plastics, there has been growing global concern about their use, reuse, recycling, and overall life cycle. According to recent reports, approximately 52 MT of plastic waste enters the environment annually. According to recent data, for the U.S., about 25% of used plastics are recycled, 8-12% are used for energy conversion, and slightly over 53% of plastic waste ends up in landfills, rivers, estuaries, and oceans. A 2024 analysis by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) warns that at the current trajectory, global municipal solid waste could increase from 2.1 BT in 2023 to 3.8 BT by 2050. The economic cost of waste mismanagement, including hidden costs such as pollution and health impacts, could rise dramatically to $640 billion annually by 2050 without intervention. The report further emphasizes the need for enhanced waste management strategies, promoting circular economies to decouple waste generation from economic growth. September 5^th is designated as the “Plastic Overshoot Day,” marking the point at which plastic waste generation exceeds global management capacity, and has shown a steady increase since its establishment in 2021.

Microplastics are generally produced due to physical disintegration and chemical, biological, and UV-induced degradation of plastic materials, arising mainly from tableware, single-use beverage bottles, grocery bags, package wrappings, and additives in cosmetics. Additional processes include the use of industrial abrasives and pallets in plastic production, commonly referred to as nurdles. These byproducts enter our environment through various mechanisms, primarily by discarding plastic waste on land or in water. Micro-nanoplastics (MNPs) are found across our ecosystems, from oceans to freshwater systems and even in the air. Many articles discuss sci-fi versions of microplastics pollution; however, omnipresent plastic pollution is found in nearly every corner of the planet. Micro- and nano-plastics are now embedded in the flesh of fish, the stalks of plants, in water, and in human bodies. While many research publications discuss the economic, safety, and medical impacts of micro- and nanoplastics in air and water, we assess their impact on defense, security, and military preparedness.

Biomedical Impact of MNPs

There is an abundance of literature describing the presence of microplastics in nearly every part of the human body, including the brain. The size of MNPs plays a vital role in determining their exposure routes, transport mechanisms, and biological interactions in both aquatic environments and organisms. These particles enter the human body through various routes, including inhalation, ingestion, and transdermal absorption. The smaller the particle size, the longer the exposure time (as smaller particulates tend to take longer to cover a given surface area), which enhances internalization into the body. Studies have shown that following exposure, bioavailable MNPs that enter the bloodstream can move to secondary organs, where they can accumulate to levels that may lead to adverse consequences at the cellular level. Smaller sizes of <100 nm can transgress the blood-brain and blood-cerebrospinal fluid barriers to directly affect the central nervous system and have also been shown to penetrate the placenta. Additionally, MNPs have been shown to increase macrophage activation in the gut, which can cause lysosomal damage and trigger the reprogramming of macrophage signaling. This, in turn, impacts bodily and brain immunity, potentially leading to impairment in neurological and cognitive function. MNP-induced neural dysfunction occurs as a result of reduced mitochondrial activity,  decreased energy metabolism, and breakdown in cellular proteins. Many polymer additives are released into the aquatic environment and lead to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the blood, food chemical codex (FCCs)  — a measure of the lactase enzyme potency measurement unit — increases in the stomach, bisphenol A (BPAs) accumulation in skin, and bronchial accumulation in the lungs.

Emerging Security, Resilience, and Safety Concerns

From a national security and defense preparedness viewpoint, it is relevant to note that MNPs entering municipal or water systems used for military purposes can compromise safe drinking water, affecting troop readiness and civilian resilience. Potentially toxic effects are especially probable when warfighters train and operate in such contaminated environments and intake large volumes of MNPs during training missions or actual operations. Furthermore, accumulation of MNPs in agriculture, aquaculture, and food chains can degrade food quality and safety, undermining national food security. MNPs are generally lighter than water and thus  float at the water-air interface, a process called neutronic plastic. Over time, the surface becomes “spongy” and tends to attract bacterial and viral vectors. In addition to this mechanism, engineered nanoplastics could be weaponized to be carriers of toxins, drugs, or other bioactive agents. A recent report studies MNP harbor contamination as a table-top exercise (TTX). It was found that MNPs can disrupt desalination processing plants, water treatment facilities, and microelectronics manufacturing systems that rely on water for integrated circuit processing.

In the marine environment, bioaccumulation and trophic transfer of MNPs threaten fish stocks, biodiversity, and food chains of both public and defense personnel. From an agricultural viewpoint, MNPs can alter soil microbiota and crop uptake, destabilizing agricultural resilience. Lack of harmonized standards for monitoring, detection, and ongoing toxicologic analysis of MNPs remains a significant concern. As well, international discourses and debates about pollution responsibility, clean-up obligations, and trade restrictions further complicate prompt resolution. Thus, MNPs pose both an environmental impact issue and an emerging security challenge to national defense, given the dual-use risk and threat presented by these nanomaterials to food/water safety, and the health and safety of military and civilian personnel. A heat map of MNP security risks provided in Fig. 1 illustrates two critical points: 1) from national security perspectives, the threat from MNPs is high and very likely; and 2) although the actual risk of convergent effects of MNPs is relatively low, its convergence incurs a higher level of risk.

Fig. 1: Heatmap risk matrix for micro/nanoplastics’ security concerns

In light of these effects and risks of MNPs, we propose the following recommendations for defense and military applications:

1. Recognize that plastic and microplastic pollution present an emergent risk, contaminating aquatic ecologies, the atmosphere, and soils, with a high likelihood of impacting military personnel's health and preparedness.

2. Acknowledge that MNPs penetrate living organisms and disrupt the physiological systems, causing a number of injurious and pathologic effects that have direct consequences for military readiness.

3. Develop defensive/deterrent technologies and training to prevent and/or mitigate the effects of MNPs; such technologies could include wearable functionalized nanomembranes for both sensing and abating biologically relevant MNP concentrations and exposures, and TTX and FTX to develop mitigation tactics and strategies for use in mission-specific operational settings.

4. Develop an advisory body to serve at the International Convention on Microplastics to contribute to and guide the following key initiatives:

• Banning non-biodegradable plastics at the global level.

• Promotion of exclusive production and use of biodegradable plastics.

• Elimination of hazardous additives (e.g., BPA, phthalates, heavy metals).

• Development and deployment of advanced technologies for neutralization and removal of existing MNPs.

5. Further engage research aimed at:

• Creating microorganisms and/or other biological agents capable of degrading MNPs.

• Developing catalytic, enzymatic, and photocatalytic degradation methods to neutralize microplastics.

6. Appeal for immediate international cooperation to involve governments and industry to implement these measures.

Conclusion

MNPs represent a novel and insidious threat vector that the military must address with the same strategic urgency applied to traditional force protection measures. These ubiquitous particles can infiltrate every operational environment, create unprecedented exposure risks, breach biological barriers, and compromise neurocognitive, immune, and cardiovascular functions, and negatively affect the health and operational readiness of joint warfighters. As well, strategic implications extend beyond individual health outcomes, as MNPs threaten force readiness through increased medical burden, reduced operational tempo, and compromised mission effectiveness; and in this light, adversaries could potentially weaponize environmental MNPs to degrade forces’ health and capability.

Therefore, we opine that military doctrine should incorporate MNP risk assessment into operational planning, equipment procurement, and health surveillance protocols. To achieve these objectives, we propose implementing exposure monitoring systems, developing protective technologies, and establishing evidence-based mitigation strategies to counter this emerging threat. In conclusion, we posit that national security demands prompt and responsible address of this challenge before it compromises the US military’s capability and competitive advantage.

	Dr. James Giordano is the Director of the Center for Disruptive Technology and Future Warfare of the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University.
	Dr. Ashok Vaseashta is a Non-resident Research Fellow of the Center for Disruptive Technology and Future Warfare of the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this essay are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the United States government, Department of Defense and/or the National Defense University.

Dr. Ashok Vaseashta is a Non-resident Research Fellow of the Center for Disruptive Technology and Future Warfare of the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University.

Dr. James Giordano is Director of the Center for Disruptive Technology and Future Warfare of the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University.

Selected References

Vaseashta, A., Stabnikov, V., Klavins, M., Ivanov, V. (2022). Decontamination of Seawater in a Harbor: Case Study of Potential Bioterrorism Attack. In: Rocha, Á., Fajardo-Toro, C.H., Rodríguez, J.M.R. (eds) Developments and Advances in Defense and Security. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 255. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4884-7_17

Khachikyan, T., Vaseashta, A., Khachatryan, G., Gevorgyan, G. (2025). Protecting Water and Wastewater Critical Infrastructure from Hybrid Threats. In: Radu, D., Hukić, M., Vaseashta, A. (eds) Countering Hybrid Threats Against Critical Infrastructures. ICSIMAT 2024. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series B: Physics and Biophysics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-2304-4_11

Vaseashta, A., Klavins, M., Stabnikova, O., Micro and Nanoplastics in Aquatic Environment, CRC Press, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003389460

Vaseashta, A., Ivanov, V., Stabnikov, V., Marinin, A. (2021). Environmental Safety and Security Investigations of Neustonic Microplastic Aggregates Near Water-Air Interphase. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 30(4), 3457-3469. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/131947.