The majority appeared to be composed of natural materials like plant cellulose and animal fur. But there were also particles of plastic, along with fragments of rubber tyres, varnish, paint and possibly synthetic fibres.
The lead scientist, Dr Melanie Bergmann, told BBC News: "We expected to find some contamination but to find this many microplastics was a real shock."
She said: "It's readily apparent that the majority of the microplastic in the snow comes from the air."
Microplastics are defined as those particles below 5mm in size.
Addressing their potential effects on people, Dr Bergmann explained: "We don't know if the plastics will be harmful to human health or not. But we need to take much better care of the way we're treating our environment."
The scientists also analysed snow from sites in Germany and Switzerland. Samples taken from some areas of Germany showed higher concentrations than in the Arctic.
How is plastic pollution reaching the Arctic?
The researchers think microplastics are being blown about by winds and then - through mechanisms which are not fully understood - transported long distances through the atmosphere.
The particles are then "washed" out of the atmosphere through precipitation, particularly snow.
Previously, research groups have found plastics in the atmospheric fallout of Dongguan, China, Tehran in Iran, and Paris, France.
As for where the pollution is coming from, here too there are uncertainties.
The presence of so many varnish particles in the Arctic was a puzzle.
The researchers assume that some of the contamination may have come from ships grinding against the ice. But they also speculate that some may have come off wind turbines.
The fibre fragments may be from people's clothing, although it's not possible to tell at the moment.
Dr Bergmann explained: "We have to ask - do we need so much plastic packaging? Do we need all the polymers in the paints we use? Can we come up with differently designed car tyres? These are important issues."
Dr Eldbjørg Sofie Heimstad, from the Norwegian Institute for Air Research, Kjeller, who was not involved in the latest study, told me that some of the particle pollution was local and some had drifted from afar.
She said: "We know that most of what we are analysing up there and measuring are long-range transported pollution coming from [Europe], from Asia, coming from all over the world.
"Some of these chemicals have properties that are a threat for the ecosystem, for living animals."
What does this mean for the Arctic?
The results follow on the heels of our exclusive report last year that the highest concentrations of plastic particles in the ocean were to be found in Arctic sea-ice.
It is depressing news for people who have regarded the far north as one of the last pristine environments on Earth.
At a dog sledding centre near Tromsø in the Norwegian Arctic, one of the staff, Lili, told us: "It makes me incredibly sad. We've got plastics in the sea-ice. We've got plastics in the ocean and on the beaches. Now plastic in snow.
"Up here we see the beauty of it every day, and to see that it's changing so much and being tainted - it hurts."
The knowledge of the danger is as old as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch but despite all, these days, every god damn conceivable thing is wrapped in plastic.
Do you think the presence of micro particles of plastic in the atmosphere would cause more nuclation for rain to form. Might it alone account for the increase in rainfall?
FYI. Eight thousand years ago, rainfall in northern Europe was eight times todays rainfall.
Reader Comments
Could they have been previously washed using the boat's water source, or any other source that we know is already contaminated with micro particles.
not flat.
FYI. Eight thousand years ago, rainfall in northern Europe was eight times todays rainfall.