The Planet Protector
Sitting Down With… Damià Barceló Cullerès, Honorary Adjunct Professor, Chemistry and Physics Department, University of Almeria, Spain
James Strachan, Frank van Geel | | 10 min read | Interview
Microplastics, chemically complex vectors for a range of harmful substances, continue to intrigue and concern Damià Barceló Cullerès: the number one-ranked “Planet Protector” in our 2024 Power List
Could you briefly introduce yourself, focusing on your background in analytical science?
I completed my chemistry degrees in Barcelona, finishing my PhD in 1984. After that, I spent a few years in Amsterdam at Vrije with Roland Frei and U. A. Th. Brinkman. Unfortunately, Professor Frei passed away at a young age, but Professor Brinkman is still with us and remains somewhat active in the field.
After returning to Spain, I joined the Research Council as a university faculty member, where I started my career in analytical chemistry with a focus on LC-MS, which was just emerging at the time. I was fortunate to learn these techniques at their origin in Amsterdam and apply them to environmental issues. My work then expanded to include a range of environmental matrices, including water, soil, sediments, and biota, and covered diverse pollutants, particularly what we now term "emerging contaminants," such as microplastics and nanomaterials.
Since then, I’ve supervised about 70 PhD students, and I still have new students joining, including two recent hires from China. Although I’m partly retired, my career has centered on fate analysis, transformation, and toxicity of emerging environmental contaminants. I primarily use mass spectrometry, as well as a range of sample preparation methods, spectroscopy, and other analytical techniques.
The Analytical Scientist Presents:
Enjoying our content? Join a growing community of like-minded individuals with the hottest topics at your fingertips, specially curated by our Editorial team.
Tell us about your current activities…
My current activities focus on student support and mentoring. I’m semi-retired, so I dedicate much of my time to mentoring, with three ongoing PhD students – two finishing this year and another next year. Additionally, I have two new students joining from China, one focusing on microplastics and the other on wastewater, using proteomics. This area, which I started about five years ago, represents a newer direction in my work.
Beyond mentoring, I maintain collaborations globally, particularly in China, where I advise several labs primarily on microplastics in soil and agro-ecosystems. There, the emphasis is on agricultural production, as the demand for food and healthy soils is high. My role involves studying the impact of microplastics, along with antibiotics and other contaminants, on soil enzymes and crop productivity.
In Italy, I collaborate on microplastics’ effects on biota and ecotoxicology. While in Lithuania, I mentor colleagues on ecosystem services and broader environmental policy issues. I also have a partnership in India, initiated during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on antibiotic resistance and SARS in wastewater.
Within Spain, I have two labs: one in Barcelona focused on environmental proteomics – analyzing peptides and proteins in wastewater – and another in Almería, working on microplastics in agriculture. Almería is an important region for food production, so we investigate microplastic contamination in tomatoes and other crops.
Additionally, a significant part of my work involves editorial roles across several journals, which is a major focus of my current activities.
The main environmental issue that you're working on is microplastics. Could you detail the dangers of microplastics and the actions we should take?
Microplastics are a very interesting area because, in many ways, they’re similar to nanomaterials. In water, they act as vectors for contaminants, somewhat like carbon-based nanomaterials. Microplastics absorb a range of harmful substances – metals, organic pollutants, and even pathogens – so they create a harmful system beyond the plastic particles themselves. This system has a destructive effect because it’s not just the microplastic that’s hazardous, but what it carries with it. That’s one aspect.
The other side is that "microplastic" encompasses many different types of polymers, such as polyethylene, polypropylene, PET and others. Each has its own properties, sizes, and ages, making the chemistry involved quite complex and, to me, very intriguing. For example, the age and degradation level of a microplastic influence its chemical interactions. A degraded microplastic, detectable by its spectral profile, might have different functional groups that interact in new ways with pollutants.
So, the real challenge and interest lie in this complex chemistry and in understanding how microplastics interact with conventional pollutants. I believe it’s essential to think of microplastics as part of a larger "cocktail" of pollutants, where microplastics act as the primary vector or transmitter. Due to their slow degradation, they’re present in the environment for extended periods and are everywhere.
And which types of contaminants are you referring to that are absorbed by microplastics?
My primary focus with microplastic interactions at the moment is on antibiotics, which I see as a major global issue. Antibiotics are overused worldwide; I recently read a paper estimating that between human and animal usage, we consume around 20 to 30 billion doses of antibiotics daily. With 8 billion people, that’s a massive amount. This excessive use leads to the development of antibiotic-resistant genes, which poses a significant environmental threat. Antibiotics like sulfamethoxazole or ciprofloxacin are present everywhere – in rivers, soils, and ecosystems. Their impact is vast, affecting not only farming but human health as well, especially over prolonged periods.
What is your personal driving force behind your research?
Well, I think it’s the sheer number of challenges still present in the field, especially as an analytical chemist. Take microplastics, for example – there are so many open questions. There aren’t standardized analytical methods for their analysis, and it’s incredibly complex. If you look at the literature, you’ll find significant variation in how measurements are conducted and reported. Some report particles per liter or particles per kilogram, but what kind of particles? What sizes? There are so many unresolved issues, and this makes the field incredibly challenging and exciting.
I recently gave a lecture to encourage young researchers. I told them there are ample opportunities for PhD theses in this area because almost everything is still uncharted – even basic things like inter-laboratory standards. Recent studies comparing standardized polymers, like polyethylene, across expert labs showed discrepancies in identification, indicating how far we are from consistent methodologies. Labs rely on different techniques, such as pyrolysis GC-MS, micro-FTIR, and micro-Raman spectroscopy, and no single lab has all of these techniques to cross-validate results. We still need international collaboration to standardize these methods and measure the impact on fish and biota accurately. If we can’t measure precisely, it’s tough to determine the environmental effects.
I don’t know how many years I have left to work on this – I'm 70 now – but I intend to do my best to make meaningful contributions in this area.
Analytical scientists are often viewed simply as data providers – the people who deliver results. What’s wrong with that?
Well, if analytical chemists only deliver results, they risk being limited in their role and impact. I believe that analytical chemists should work more interdisciplinarily, with fields like medicine, toxicology, and engineering. We should be involved not only in producing data but also in interpreting it – explaining what a nanogram or microgram level actually means in practical terms. We need to take that extra step beyond data delivery. If we remain data providers only, we’ll continue to be viewed as mere analysts.
However, if we collaborate with others and apply our skills to broader contexts, we can attract more interest and demonstrate the unique contributions analytical chemistry can make. Many in our field already work across disciplines – food safety, environmental health – but there’s always more we can do to learn from others and expand our impact.
Are contaminants the biggest environmental problem we face today?
The environment is incredibly complex. We’re facing climate change, and that makes it hard to interpret what’s happening clearly. For instance, at the end of my microplastics lecture, one question I often pose to the audience is, “What’s more important – microplastic contamination or the effects of climate change?” A few years ago, there was an incident in Swiss rivers where fishermen couldn’t catch salmon. Initially, people thought contamination was to blame, but the real issue turned out to be an increase in river temperature.
This example shows how many factors are at play beyond contaminants. Climate change impacts everything, affecting lives significantly and influencing ecosystems in ways that may overshadow the effects of certain pollutants. While both microplastics and climate change are critical, the temperature increase alone can have a profound impact on living organisms.
Contaminant levels in rivers, thankfully, are somewhat better controlled than they were two decades ago, thanks to tighter regulations. But there are so many variables in play, and climate change now appears to be a leading driver affecting our environment. It’s essential to consider climate change first in many cases, as it has such a wide-reaching impact.
And how can analytical scientists help with that issue?
Analytical scientists play a crucial role because our expertise is in measurement and delivering accurate, standardized data. This ability to provide reliable numbers is essential. In climate change work, for example, there are many modelers, and while modeling has value, it sometimes makes assumptions that don’t fully reflect reality. I’ve seen this firsthand in the area of microplastics. A few years ago, we conducted a collaborative study on European rivers and compared our measured data with global modeling results. The models often predicted higher contamination levels than what we actually measured, sometimes by as much as 30–50 percent. That’s why reliable measurements are essential – they offer concrete data we can trust for drawing conclusions.
Although modeling is less expensive than monitoring, it may not be as accurate. I once discussed this with an EU project officer who explained that funding often favors modeling due to lower costs, despite monitoring being the ideal. Good analytical chemistry does come with costs – our instruments can be hundreds of thousands of euros, making it an expensive field. But accurate measurements, which give us real-world data, are what should guide our environmental actions.
Models are useful, but they aren’t always correct. And even within the modeling community, there’s often debate: one modeler may not use another’s work because they each believe their own model is superior. Analytical scientists help ground these debates in reality by delivering accurate, field-tested data that models alone cannot provide. This is our strength and contribution, and it’s where we should continue to focus.
Finally, could you summarize where analytical scientists should go from here – or what direction should they choose?
We need to prioritize precise measurements and collaboration across various fields. Take ecotoxicology, for instance; they often model but still rely on us to measure actual pollutant levels in organisms like fish or crustaceans. This is where analytical chemistry becomes essential – our measurements provide the baseline data they need. The same applies to engineers, who might want to know how much of a contaminant is removed during wastewater treatment. But as I always have to explain – their methods can create new metabolites that might be harmful. Analytical chemists are crucial because we can identify these metabolites and look beyond the primary compound to see what else is produced in these processes.
There are strong points we bring to our colleagues in fields like toxicology and engineering; we can help explain what’s actually happening in a plant, a fish, or a wastewater system. If, for example, a medication like carbamazepine breaks down, it can result in numerous secondary chemicals, each with its own potential impacts. Our work reveals this complexity, while other fields may focus only on the disappearance of the parent compound, assuming the issue is resolved.
This depth of insight is what makes analytical chemistry an indispensable discipline. Yes, it’s expensive work, with advanced instruments sometimes costing millions, but it allows us to give highly accurate data and explain what’s occurring in different environmental contexts. And this is our strength – to observe, detect, and interpret, providing clarity where other disciplines might miss critical details. From my experience, these strengths help foster respect and collaboration with engineers, ecotoxicologists, and soil scientists, and it reinforces the essential role of analytical chemistry in solving complex problems.
Damià Barceló Cullerès is Honorary Adjunct Professor, Chemistry and Physics Department, University of Almeria, Spain
Over the course of my Biomedical Sciences degree it dawned on me that my goal of becoming a scientist didn’t quite mesh with my lack of affinity for lab work. Thinking on my decision to pursue biology rather than English at age 15 – despite an aptitude for the latter – I realized that science writing was a way to combine what I loved with what I was good at.
From there I set out to gather as much freelancing experience as I could, spending 2 years developing scientific content for International Innovation, before completing an MSc in Science Communication. After gaining invaluable experience in supporting the communications efforts of CERN and IN-PART, I joined Texere – where I am focused on producing consistently engaging, cutting-edge and innovative content for our specialist audiences around the world.
Frank van Geel is owner of educational website Chromedia and Scientific Director of The Analytical Scientist. He studied analytical chemistry, specialized in mass spectrometry in the Netherlands and did several years of post-doc work in spectroscopy with Jim Winefordner at the University of Florida in the US. Then he became a science teacher and later publisher in chemistry and physics related topics. He developed numerous publications in chemistry and other sciences. He strongly supports the mission: Building online communities is the road to take. We need to strengthen the quality of analytical chemistry and we need to strengthen our community by sharing know-how and by sharing our opinions, visions and our views of the future of analytical science.