logo
I've Been Diving for 22 Years—These Are the 8 Best Reef-safe Sunscreens I've Tried

I've Been Diving for 22 Years—These Are the 8 Best Reef-safe Sunscreens I've Tried

I was 13 the first time I saw a coral reef. The endless blue of the ocean gave way to an explosion of color unlike anything I'd seen before. Colorful schools of fish moved around vibrant corals while the sun shone through, glittering like a stained glass window set aflame by the sun. In the 22 years since that moment, I've been fortunate enough to go snorkeling and diving all over the world, from the cold waters of Jeju Island in Korea to the warmth of the Indian Ocean in Seychelles and numerous places in the Caribbean.
Although coral reefs are still magical, there is an uncomfortable truth anyone who knows the ocean has to painfully acknowledge: Corals are dying. According to the National Park Service, swimmers leech an estimated 4,000 to 6,000 tons of sunscreen into the ocean every year, and sunscreen has been linked to coral bleaching—a phenomenon wherein coral loses its vibrant pigment and turns white over time, becoming weak and susceptible to starvation and death.
It's been a long time since I've seen a truly thriving reef; even the one I visited in middle school is mostly bleached now. Though we may not individually have the power to reverse climate change, there are smaller—albeit very significant—actions that we can take, like switching to reef-safe sunscreens. Since terms like 'reef-safe' are unregulated, consumers should look out for specific ingredients when choosing an eco-conscious sunscreen, especially oxybenzone and octinoxate. Now banned in places like Hawaii, Mexico, and Aruba, these ingredients aren't just harmful for marine life, but have also been linked to hormone disruption in humans. Other toxic ingredients to avoid include non-nano-sized zinc or titanium, parabens, and triclosan.
To keep coral reefs as healthy as possible while diving, I've tested out several reef-safe sunscreens. Keep scrolling for eight travel-friendly, reef-safe sunscreens I recommend that are perfectly sized for stowing in your carry-on luggage.
Thrive's Mineral Face SPF is the only reef-safe facial sunscreen I found that was able to replace my regular one. The formula states that it's made for sensitive skin, and it delivers on its promise. It's lightweight and soothing for my rosacea and acne-prone face. It also leaves no white cast. As a bonus, all Thrive products are plastic negative, meaning that the company recovers more plastic from the ocean than it uses to package its products. My only qualm with it is that the SPF is lower than I would like, and that the body sunscreen is too large to pack in a carry-on.
Since it costs nearly $30 for 2 ounces, I wouldn't use this product when I'm at the beach and need to reapply sunscreen around the clock. Instead, I'd use this for daily life and SPF touch-ups, and opt for longer-lasting options when I plan to be outside in the sun all day. It's important to remember that using reef-safe sunscreen is still important for protecting aquatic environments, even if you're not near the ocean—harmful chemicals from non-reef-safe sunscreens can seep into local water sources when you shower.
SurfDurt Mineral SPF is now one of my favorite facial sunscreens, especially because of its impressively short list of 10 ingredients, including organic cocoa butter, organic coconut oil, and natural iron oxide pigment. There is nothing on the list that I don't recognize, so I feel comfortable diving while wearing it, knowing I'm not harming the very reefs that I'm swimming next to.
I've also found that this product is perfect for kids. My three-year-old niece, who usually hates putting on sunscreen, loves it so much to the point where I have to tell her to save some for later. Since it's not a messy, runny liquid, she's able to put it on herself, making the SPF application process feel more like a game than an annoying pre-pool requirement. Since I have mixed skin, this sunscreen is a bit too greasy for me to use every day. But when I made my brother, another sunscreen hater, try it, he said that it worked well for his dry skin.
I love that you don't have to ever worry about the sunscreen spilling all over your suitcase or purse, and that you can reuse the cool bamboo and tin packaging to pack things like jewelry and pills once you're run out of product. If you've never used tin sunscreen before, try it out for yourself; you'll probably end up appreciating how nice and smooth it feels without leaving your hands gooey or greasy.
Hawaiian-based Kokua Sun Care contains natural, locally-grown ingredients like spirulina, noni, flower extracts, and seed oils; however, its formula also includes chemical ingredients. Despite being the most expensive sunscreen on the list, its texture isn't very smooth, so you'll have to thoroughly rub it in. That said, it has a high SPF, and it doesn't leave a white cast or have a strong smell, which are two factors that I believe justify the high price.
For the packaging, the company uses bio-based sugar cane that is chemically identical to polyethylene, making it easy to recycle. Because sugar cane absorbs more CO2 while growing than the amount that is released when making the packaging, this is considered a carbon-negative packaging solution, giving this sunscreen option bonus points for eco-friendliness.
Badger sunscreen is dermatologist-approved, and it's not hard to see why. The product is fairly lightweight and doesn't leave a white cast, which means you can reapply it multiple times without overwhelming your skin. It wins bonus points for its high SPF and relatively low price.
The brand's facial sunscreen is great as well, and it doesn't make my sensitive skin react. I could definitely see this becoming my to-go product for daily protection if I couldn't shell out $30 for the Thrive restock. I use the tin version in order to reduce plastic waste, but the company has a tube sunscreen with 50 percent recycled plastic packaging, and all products are made in solar-powered facilities within the U.S.
The thing I love the most about Raw Elements' SPF is that you can recognize everything on the ingredient list. Besides non-nano zinc oxide, you'll find ingredients like sunflower, organic beeswax, mango, green tea leaf extract, rosemary, and coffee. This gives the product a strong smell, but it's not a chemical one, so I actually prefer its scent to that of most 'regular' sunscreens.
Other positives are that it doesn't leave a white cast, and that it feels nourishing, especially if you have dry skin. While the product is supposed to be used on both the body and face, my sensitive face immediately started itching when I put it on. The rest of my body reacts well to it, though, so I'd recommend this as an affordable body sunscreen made with natural ingredients.
Besides having the coolest logo out of all the sunscreens on this list, Raw Love SPF earns points for being the smoothest tin sunscreen I've ever tried. Its ingredient list is short and mostly made up of organic ingredients, like coconut oil and shea butter, and it has a fresh, minty smell. This Maui-based brand was founded by a marine biologist, which explains its commitment and dedication to keeping things natural and healthy for both humans and sea life.
Unfortunately for me, this product is a bit too oily to put daily on my mixed-type skin, though Amazon reviews claim it works well with other skin types—some people even use it as a makeup primer. While the product's consistency is fantastic, it only comes in a 2-ounce or 4-ounce packaging, so if you need to keep it TSA-friendly, you'll have to opt for the smaller of the two. There is a minimal white cast that wasn't very noticeable on my pale skin, though it might be more obvious on darker skin tones.
Stream2Sea's sunscreen is not greasy and doesn't make my rosacea flare up—this alone immediately earned it a spot on this list. I also like that the product is biodegradable and packaged in recycled materials. The only downside is that it leaves a noticeable white cast, even after rubbing intensely. If this is a non-negotiable for you, I've found that the tinned balm version doesn't have this issue, so I'll certainly be making it my go-to for dive days when I mostly reapply to my hands and face.
Besides foregoing the use of harmful chemicals, the company claims to have developed a sunscreen product that actually helps corals—aptly named Coral Care—by providing nutrients that naturally exist in sea water, though this study is still being peer reviewed. Although the Coral Care sunscreen line isn't available on Amazon yet, you can purchase it on Stream2Sea's website.
While Blue Lizard's products are Hawaiian Act 104-compliant—meaning that they contain no octinoxate or oxybenzone—they do have more chemical ingredients than the other options on this list. Still, this sunscreen has a high SPF, works well for sensitive skin, and beats out the competition in terms of affordability. It was also the only reef-safe sunscreen that I could find at my local drugstore, making it more easily accessible than brands that you have to order online.
It is worth noting that it rubs clear when you first put it on, but then turns slightly white when you go into the water. Overall, I'd keep this as a last-minute or low-budget option for when you can't get any of the other recommended sunscreens—and despite this shortcoming, I'd definitely still choose it over products made with chemicals that are harming the ocean.
Love a great deal? Sign up for our T+L Recommends newsletter and we'll send you our favorite travel products each week.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What Travelers Need to Know About the Fire Raging at the Grand Canyon
What Travelers Need to Know About the Fire Raging at the Grand Canyon

New York Times

time7 hours ago

  • New York Times

What Travelers Need to Know About the Fire Raging at the Grand Canyon

The Dragon Bravo Fire, which destroyed the Grand Canyon Lodge and has forced the closure of parts of Grand Canyon National Park, grew to more than 123,000 acres on Monday. The sweeping wildfire is 13 percent contained and continues to pose risks for visitors. The North Rim, a remote area that draws only about 10 percent of the park's visitors, has borne the brunt of the damage and is closed through 2025. The more popular South Rim remains open, though various restrictions are in place. There are also closures within the inner canyon because of smoke accumulation, particularly on trails that link the North and South Rims to the Colorado River below. Here's what travelers should know about safety and the fires in the Grand Canyon. Is it safe to visit Grand Canyon National Park? Yes, much of the park remains safe to visit, though travelers should heed the latest alerts from the National Park Service. In addition to the fire closures, the park also issued an extreme heat warning on Monday, citing 'dangerously hot conditions' in the lower elevations of the Grand Canyon. (Summer heat can be deadly for hikers at the park.) The park recommends that all hikers bring adequate gear, including sunscreen, a wide-brimmed hat, salty snacks, sufficient water and electrolyte drink mix. 'Doubling your calorie intake helps maintain your energy,' the warning states. As always, travelers should remain cautious about hiking alone and should familiarize themselves with the locations of water stations within the park to help avoid dehydration. Travelers should also monitor the air quality. As a general rule, an Air Quality Index over 100 or above can pose health risks for older adults, children and people with lung or heart conditions. An index above 150 is considered unhealthy. Visitors should consider wearing a mask if air quality worsens. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Hikers rescued by helicopter from remote beach after rising tides cut off their only way out
Hikers rescued by helicopter from remote beach after rising tides cut off their only way out

Fox News

time15 hours ago

  • Fox News

Hikers rescued by helicopter from remote beach after rising tides cut off their only way out

Dramatic video captures the moment two hikers were rescued after becoming stranded on a secluded beach near one of Point Reyes National Seashore's most dangerous hazards. The pair became trapped near Elephant Rock when rising tides cut off their only way out, according to a social media update from the Sonoma County Sheriff's Office. After spending several hours in the area, the hikers realized they were stuck and called emergency services, department spokesperson Emily Fuller said in a statement to SFGATE. Due to the lack of safe access by land or sea, a helicopter crew was dispatched to carry out the rescue. Using a 100-foot line, responders hoisted the hikers from the beach after securing them in a "hot seat," a harness designed for aerial rescues. The hikers were then flown to the Marin County Fire Department, the sheriff's office confirmed. Fortunately, no injuries were reported. Video of the rescue shows the dramatic scene as a rescuer descends to the rocky shoreline, then lifts off with both hikers suspended above the water. While Point Reyes is a popular destination for hiking and coastal exploration, it poses serious risks, the National Park Service warns. "The ocean is among the most dangerous features at Point Reyes," the park's website notes. Visitors are cautioned about dangers such as powerful surf, unexpected "sneaker" waves, strong currents, polluted water, cold temperatures and hidden hot coals. There are no lifeguards, and the area features challenging terrain, including unstable cliffs and bluffs. Fuller emphasized that some beach areas can become "completely locked in" once the tide rises, leaving no safe path out. She advised that anyone exploring the coastline should check tide charts and carry a reliable way to call for help. "Having access to emergency communication is crucial," she added. "Some parts of the coastline don't have cell service, so carrying a satellite communication device like a Garmin inReach could be a lifesaver." Fox News Digital reached out to the Sonoma County Sheriff's Office and National Parks for comment, but did not immediately receive a response. Stepheny Price is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business. She covers topics including missing persons, homicides, national crime cases, illegal immigration, and more. Story tips and ideas can be sent to

Some Foreign Tourists Must Soon Pay $15,000 Bond To Enter U.S.
Some Foreign Tourists Must Soon Pay $15,000 Bond To Enter U.S.

Forbes

time20 hours ago

  • Forbes

Some Foreign Tourists Must Soon Pay $15,000 Bond To Enter U.S.

The U.S. State Department will require tourists and business travelers from some countries to provide a steep financial guarantee they will not overstay their visas—the latest initiative by the government to tighten requirements for foreign visitors. Sticker shock: The Trump administration will charge some foreign visitors up to $15,000 to enter the U.S. getty The State Department announced a 12-month pilot program under which people from some countries could be required to post bonds of $5,000, $10,000 or $15,000 when they apply for a visa, according to a preview of a notice that will be published Tuesday in the Federal Register. The pilot program targets 'aliens applying for visas as temporary visitors for business or pleasure (B-1/B-2)' from countries with 'high visa overstay rates, where screening and vetting information is deemed deficient.' The notice does not name the affected countries or detail how tourists would reclaim the refunded bond at the end of their stay. The program will also target countries offering Citizenship by Investment programs with no residency requirement—a more lax policy of some immigration-by-investment programs in the Caribbean, European and Middle East. 'The scope of the visa bond pilot program appears to be limited, with an estimated 2,000 applicants affected, most likely from only a few countries with relatively low travel volume to the United States,' Erik Hansen, senior vice president of government relations at U.S. Travel Association (USTA), said in a statement. Last month, Congress announced a $250 visa integrity fee for most non-immigrant U.S. visas, including tourist visas, beginning in 2026. A recent study from the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) that analyzed the economic impact of tourism in 184 countries revealed the U.S. was the only country forecast to see international visitor spending decline in 2025—in part due to a number of Trump administration initiatives that make it more difficult or expensive for foreign travelers to enter the U.S. 'We remain most concerned with the $250 visa integrity fee recently enacted by Congress, which would apply across all nonimmigrant visa categories and applicants,' Hansen said, noting the fee would mean 'the U.S. will have one of, if not the highest, visitor visa fees in the world.' For the U.S. to remain competitive in the global travel market, 'it's critical that U.S. visa policy reflects both national security priorities and the significant economic value of international visitation,' Hansen added. Big Number $254 billion. That's how much international tourists spent on U.S. travel and tourism-related goods and services in 2024, according to the International Trade Administration. Whether yet another financial hurdle for tourists will impact attendance at World Cup 2026. In March, FIFA projected the soccer tournament will drive $30.5 billion in economic output in the U.S., according to an analysis by OpenEconomics (OE). But that number was predicated on the assumption the U.S. will see an 'influx of visitors' from foreign countries to fill stadiums and hotels. FIFA has told World Cup host cities to expect a 50/50 split between domestic and international visitors, multiple host city tourism officials told Forbes. Chief Critic 'Raising fees on lawful international visitors amounts to a self-imposed tariff on one of our nation's largest exports: international travel spending,' Geoff Freeman, president of the U.S. Travel Association (USTA), said in a statement last month when the visa integrity fee was announced. Further Reading Trump's Big Beautiful Bill Has A Nasty Surprise For World Cup Tourists (Forbes) How A 48-Country Travel Ban Could Suppress U.S. Tourism In A World Cup Year (Forbes)

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store