Plastic in the oceans

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

desol

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2005
Messages
2,172
...could probably be cleaned up by an army of these:
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/technology-43402897/meet-sofi-the-soft-robot-fish-developed-by-mit

Drop a big, temporary collection net close to the site, add an arm with a hand to each one, program away...set to stun.

Haul away a month later. Repeat..?
 
This seems ideal for recycling if it was as densely accumulated (plastic) as some suggest.

I read that a major fraction of it was waste (nets and tackle) from fishing vessels, not just household trash.

This has been studied since the 80's IIRC.  I wonder if it affects the surface light reflection and heat absorption. 

At one point researchers wanted to seed the ocean surface with iron to promote plankton growth blooms to absorb and sequester CO2. Of course who knows what unintended consequences that could precipitate. 

JR
 
I think the answer is to simply clean up our mess, and let nature take care of the rest.
 
desol said:
I think the answer is to simply clean up our mess, and let nature take care of the rest.
I can barely keep my yard clean....  but yes the fishing boats need some accountability for their trash, ocean liners too....

JR
 
If this proves practical it seems like the smartest way to go.


http://www.thedrive.com/news/9748/roads-made-of-recycled-plastic-are-being-tested-in-britain
 
I've been wondering this for so long? Roads + plastic. Seems a great idea?

Thanks for that link Lasso.
 
For the last ten years or so a company called Indaver has been seeking planning for a plastic incineration plant not too far from where I live , the aim of this is to produce energy from waste ,they claim, of course, they can do it cleanly . Problem is, if an industry that makes a profit from this springs up wheres the incentive to reduce the amount of plastic crap we use and throw away in the first place. Its just another ass to mouth scheme dreamt up by industry to turn a quick profit at the expense of the health of local people. Sure piling up landfill with plastics is wastefull ,but its a fairly inert substance in itself and doesnt pose a major health risk to man nor animal in its raw state . Food waste is the major issue when it comes to landfill ,it attracts vermin and subsequently produces gas and foul smells  which can be problematic for people living nearby .Im not sure plastic waste from boats and ships accounts for much of what ends up in the oceans, however on a visit to the local yacht club lately they had an awareness campaign relating to dumping of plastics ,which was encouraging see. The idea of reusing plastics in building materials isnt new but its certainly one that deserves  more funding and research to find out the pro's and con's.
 
desol said:
I've been wondering this for so long? Roads + plastic. Seems a great idea?

Thanks for that link Lasso.

www sez said:
  http://www.asphaltpavement.org/recycling
Not only does asphalt provide the smoothest, quietest ride, it also is the most sustainable option for paving. Over the years, the asphalt pavement industry has been a constant innovator in finding ways to make its products more environmentally friendly — from reclaiming old asphalt pavements and rejuvenating their component parts for use in new pavements to the incorporation of recycled materials to the adoption of energy-saving warm-mix asphalt technologies. 

Literally millions of tons of recycled media used in roadways.

JR
 
Thanks for the link John. I didn't realize so much recycled media was being incorporated into roads. It's nice to see and I'm not entirely surprised. It makes sense.

I supposed my line of thinking was leaning towards something that has the potential to increase service life requiring less frequent maintenance, and something that could potentially benefit the environment even more so considering the amount of plastic that is not currently being utilized for these purposes(or other similar(construction) purposes). ie: plastic belongs in construction. Of course, these are just thoughts outside of actual objective analysis/proof...

Here's a study done in 2013, involving the inclusion of plastic bottle material and the resulting benefits obtained thereof: http://jestec.taylors.edu.my/Vol%208%20Issue%203%20June%2013/Volume%20(8)%20Issue%20(3)%20264-%20271.pdf

In the link that you provided, while showing the degree of current recycled materials used, there doesn't appear to be any plastics mentioned. Maybe increasing the inclusion of these materials into construction(road) materials poses significant, wide ranging benefits above and beyond what we presently enjoy.



 
I don't pay close attention to this but I vaguely recall tires being recycled into road surfaces (ironic, or just symmetrical?).

Plastic is probably more valuable recycled to make new plastic, while harder to get pure white/clear recycled plastic.

At some point oil will be more valuable for making plastic than burning for energy but not quite yet. They are also making progress modifying food starches to make plastic like media.

JR
 
Yes, I guess tires do equate to plastic...but above and beyond that...
 
In the Swedish article its does point out the major downside of burning plastic ,you start with a more or less harmless waste product ,when its incinerated it become hazardous/toxic waste , the volume is reduced by something like 10:1.
It would be technically possible to burn it cleanly ,but that would require oxygen added to the furnace and that would most likely make it uneconomical from a power generation point of view ,I hope the authorities here take note of the Swedish experience before deciding to sanction the building of this filthy industry .
 
Tubetec said:
In the Swedish article its does point out the major downside of burning plastic ,you start with a more or less harmless waste product ,when its incinerated it become hazardous/toxic waste , the volume is reduced by something like 10:1.
It would be technically possible to burn it cleanly ,but that would require oxygen added to the furnace and that would most likely make it uneconomical from a power generation point of view ,I hope the authorities here take note of the Swedish experience before deciding to sanction the building of this filthy industry .
Burning waste for energy is not a new concept.  I haven't paid attention to this for several decades but I seem to recall very high combustion temperatures being involved.

JR
 
Yeah I studied up on the subject before ,theres a minimum tempreture invloved to reduce or eliminate the formation of dioxins ,as I said adding oxygen aint cheap and it cuts into the bottom line of whatever is produced in energy terms .Theres many corners to be cut in the incineration game to maximise profits as well as 'foxers' the opperatives can do to cream a little off the top for themselves.I think the general concensus nowadays is theres better ways than burning plastics ,there is of course other forms of waste management via incineration ,as far as I know in Belfast they burn waste oils and desicated faeces right in the centre of the city ,its a little cleaner I guess ,but you never know what industrial gank ends up down the sewers ,so far from perfect either.
 
It has recently come out that while town Recycling here takes glass, the price of scrap glass is so low that they have been trucking it to landfill.

Also paper production is SO fallen-off that, here in The Pine Tree State, pulp-logs purchases are 1/4 what they were 2 years ago. Yet paper is by far the largest bin at the recycling station. My waste paper/cardboard is probably costing some logger real work.

I did not know my roof-shingles could go to pavement.
 
The original post is in reference to plastics in the ocean, of the billions of metric tons of plastics that have been produced, much has wound up in the oceans.
This all gradually becomes mico-particulates, which are consistantly found in the flesh of every creature from the oceans that is  tested. It is likely a contributing factor to extremely low birth rates and and extremely high cancer rates of many ocean species.
Along with rapid climate change, this is a imminent  calamity caused by human behavior that urgently needs solutions.
There are efforts and ideas to collect these wastes ( https://www.theoceancleanup.com/ ) that have promise, IMHO important areas to allocate resources to.
 
nielsk said:
The original post is in reference to plastics in the ocean, of the billions of metric tons of plastics that have been produced, much has wound up in the oceans.
This all gradually becomes mico-particulates, which are consistantly found in the flesh of every creature from the oceans that is  tested. It is likely a contributing factor to extremely low birth rates and and extremely high cancer rates of many ocean species.
Along with rapid climate change, this is a imminent  calamity caused by human behavior that urgently needs solutions.
There are efforts and ideas to collect these wastes ( https://www.theoceancleanup.com/ ) that have promise, IMHO important areas to allocate resources to.
You seem to be making claims not in the science (yet).

WWWsez said:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935115300591
A plethora of recent scientific reports testifies to challenges the world is facing from an ever-increasing marine plastic pollution. Toxicological concerns have been put forward, but possible links between the now ubiquitous synthetic polymers and human as well as wildlife cancers remain to be investigated.

Plastic food containers have been accused of causing cancer for decades. I pay attention to cancer risk after losing a couple siblings and multiple close relatives to the big C.

I believe I will keep eating Pacific ocean salmon, who mostly eat plankton, but I avoid fish higher up the food chain (tuna, swordfish, etc) who eat small fish and accumulate more toxins (not necessarily from plastic). The oceans are the world's garbage dump and lots of heavy metals from Chinese coal plant smoke ends up in the oceans.

JR

PS: Overfishing of several ocean species have threatened some fish stocks. Overfishing of top of food chain predators (like tuna), shift populations selectively to lower species. The US coastal waters practice some fishery management but we are not the largest fishermen and other nations are less disciplined (honest?).  China eats more seafood than they produce, and the frozen salmon I cook with is caught off alaska but processed/frozen in China. 
 
I tend to go with Neilsk's view on plastics and the marine environment ,these microscopic bits of plastic tend to bond with other polutants and get lodged in the gills of fish ,moluscs and filter feeding shell fish are extremely sensitive to polution and there are plenty of studies that show that , a buddy of mine did a study about 20 years ago on a species here in the harbour known as the dog whelk ,he found all kinds of deformaties of their reproduction system and apparently now ,you just dont find them here anymore . A conseravtive estimate a good few years ago said something like 5% of the worlds chemicals were produced in the lower Cork harbour area , its not recomended to eat anything ,especially shells fish from the harbour itself .The moluscs are a very ancient creature ,here much much longer than us , there also a key indicator of water quality . Very good point about nature of the food chain as well John ,large predatory species are best avoided ,they tend to accumulate the nastiest crap .Im lucky Im right by the sea and the mackeral litterally jump out of the water in late summer. My Grandad was a keen sport fisherman back in the day ,but only ever took as much as he needed for the table ,I was born and raised on the finest wild line caught fish , I try to put fish on the menu at least twice a week ,in fact this very good Friday night I made a  fish pie with fresh cod and smoked coley , I dont need any religious dictat telling me to eat fish ,I just love the stuff anyway.
 
Back
Top