13 ms·
Great Pacific garbage patch cleanup fails to collect plastic
- walrus01 8y agoprevious discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17899395 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17899395
- snissn 8y agoDoes anyone know what the origin of the plastic is? Specifically what percentage of it is from a) what countries and b) what sort of products?
- cultus 8y agoGenerally, poorer countries tend to be bigger sources due to worse sanitation. A huge proportion is from stryofoam or other plastics on fishing nets or buoys. Plastic bags are the single biggest source on land. Plastic bag bans are really important.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- goatsi 8y ago>Around 90 percent of the plastic polluting our oceans comes from just ten rivers, a new study has shown. >Eight of those rivers are in Asia, with the remaining two — the Nile and the Niger — in Africa. https://nypost.com/2017/12/12/10-rivers-are-responsible-for-90-of-the-plastic-in-the-ocean/ https://nypost.com/2017/12/12/10-rivers-are-responsible-for-...
- jessaustin 8y ago(Yangtze, Indus, Yellow, Hai, Nile, Meghna, Pearl, Amur, Niger, Mekong)
- epicureanideal 8y agoSo it seems that filtering the output of these rivers seems like a feasible solution to dramatically reduce ocean plastic. It doesn't sound prohibitively expensive.
- ptoniato 8y agoIt is incorrect: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/42315/do-10-asian-and-african-rivers-generate-90-of-plastic-trash-in-the-ocean https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/42315/do-10-asi...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Maximus9000 8y agoMostly 10 rivers in developing countries [1] and fishing equipment [2] 1. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stemming-the-plastic-tide-10-rivers-contribute-most-of-the-plastic-in-the-oceans/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stemming-the-plas... 2. https://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/ocean-plastic-made-discarded-fishing-nets/ https://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/ocean-plastic-made-disca...
- ptoniato 8y agoIt is incorrect: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/42315/do-10-asian-and-african-rivers-generate-90-of-plastic-trash-in-the-ocean https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/42315/do-10-asi...
- not_kurt_godel 8y agotl;dr for those too lazy to click: > Approximately 0.8 million tons annually of marine debris, which is 12% of the total debris input into the oceans, originates from land-based sources, and primarily consists of discarded plastic items (user plastic). In highly populated areas, marine debris comes primarily from the land. [...] The 10 top-ranked rivers transport 88–95% of the global load into the sea. While I agree the "90% of plastics in ocean" stat is incorrect, it does seem very relevant to note that "90% of land-originating plastics in ocean" is the actual statistic (land-originating plastics representing about 10-12% of total). Clearly, awareness needs to be raised about ocean-originating plastics. Thanks for bringing attention to this.
- slavik81 8y agoIsn't that the fishing equipment mentioned in the parent comment? If not, what are 'ocean-originating plastics'? Edit: From the Wikipedia article linked by balfirevic: > "Merchant ships expel cargo, sewage, used medical equipment, and other types of waste that contain plastic into the ocean. [....] The largest ocean-based source of plastic pollution is discarded fishing gear (including traps and nets)"
- pkaye 8y agoSome articles I've read recently indicate a lot of the plastics are from fishing nets.
- cultus 8y agoThe Ocean Cleanup Project is essentially a scam at this point. It can't work for numerous ecological (scoops up ocean life) and engineering (the ocean is HUGE, corrosive, and violent) reasons. Not to mention that ocean microplastics are distributed throughout the first 100 meters of ocean water, and this goes nowhere near that deep. Of course, they dismiss these concerns or deflect with scientific BS (which the media gobbles up) whenever they are brought up. They can't get this to work on such a minuscule scale in placid water off the coast of the Netherlands, it won't work in the North Pacific on a far grander scale.
- keypusher 8y agoCleaning up the significant amount of plastic that is on the surface still seems like a step in the right direction, even if there is other micropastic further down. The impact on ocean life is not well understood, but we do know that plastic is already having a devastating impact on such life, and I have a hard time imagining this would be worse. The engineering challenges are significant, as they are clearly discovering, but they are at least trying. Are there other more promising projects to clean up existing plastic from the ocean you are aware of?
- sandworm101 8y agoThere is only so much money and energy in the world. Wasting resources on doomed projects doesn't help. It only takes away resources from far more efficient projects. Most ocean plastic comes form a limited number of sources, a handful of large rivers. Cleanup should begin at those rivers. This project is like someone cleaning the coal ash off the forest rather than prevent it from getting there in the first place.
- deadwing0 8y agoThis argument reminds me of the EEV vlog on solar raods. :D Edit: https://www.eevblog.com/2014/06/20/eevblog-632-solar-roadways-are-bullshit/ https://www.eevblog.com/2014/06/20/eevblog-632-solar-roadway...
- 8y ago
- keypusher 8y agoI hope they can figure it out, but it seems like they may have missed something significant in their simulations. If the water basically pools and becomes stagnant within the boundary of the catcher, then it makes sense that currents will route around the boundary and therefore carry plastic around it also. The long skirt seems like part of the problem, as it's trapping all the water in that area, but my knowledge of fluid ocean dynamics is nonexistant so perhaps I'm wrong. The idea of a passive system is nice, but it seems like the problem would be easier if they had some form of propulsion with a renewable energy source to drive it forward.
- afarrell 8y agoI wish there was some ISO standard for packaging decomposability in water. Then folks could design to a specific grade and companies could get another “hey we’re green” cookie from consumers. Grade 1 - 6 days in fresh water/8 days in salt water. Grade 2 - 4 weeks in fresh water/7 weeks in salt water Grade 3 - 3 months in fresh water/6 months in salt water Grade 4 - 2 years in fresh water / 3 years in salt water Flip those numbers around as appropriate. Materials scientists, I’d be interested to know the barriers to some standard like this being designed. The ones I can think of are: - What is the bacterial culture in the water? What ph? - How powerful would the incentives be? - How much more expensive would the packaging be to make? Would it result in notably greater spoilage?
- agumonkey 8y agoclear linear information is a very nice way to improve people's behavior
- will_brown 8y agoIt really does, that’s why corporations fight tooth and nail on every attempt at labeling requirements. From cigarette warnings, to food nutritional/ingredient labels, to modern fights by big Ag against having to label genetically modified food and food stuffs. It’s funny watching their lobbiest argue against gmo labels, it goes something like “it would be damaging to us to have to label our products with gmo labels, because consumers would largely stop buying our products, and there is no science to back gmo products dangerous. We need to continue studying.” My thought is who cares if science says gmos are harmful, if consumers would want to know so they could avoid a product, as admitted by the lobbiest, shouldn’t be entitled to know?
- jjoonathan 8y agoSounds good, so long as we include products of traditional genetic modification techniques, like selective breeding, and slap a severity degree on there to account for the number of genes edited in the process (or perhaps deviation from a reference genotype?). If consumers want to know, shouldn't they be entitled to know?
- nartz 8y agoIdea: Make the 'net' much more fuzzy/pronged, so plastic bumping against it against it naturally clings or clumps (i'm thinking naval hair/fuzz here)
- Y_Y 8y agoIs that supposed to be a pun on "navel" and "naval"? Ouch.
- chaser999 8y agoSo let's say we can pull all this plastic out of the ocean, then where do we put it? Won't it just find it's way back to the ocean?
- PakG1 8y agoIf it can get economical, it won't (at least, not for a while). There are interesting cases of companies trying to make shoe products from ocean plastic (or perhaps it's shoreline plastic before it reaches the ocean, I can't really tell, but that's still helpful too). Adidas is the most marketable, but as I understand it, a few other companies are doing something similar, while some other companies aren't sourcing ocean plastic, but are sourcing water bottles. https://www.parley.tv/oceanplastic/#parley-air-strategy-1 https://www.parley.tv/oceanplastic/#parley-air-strategy-1 https://www.adidas.com/us/parley https://www.adidas.com/us/parley https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/14/adidas-sold-1-million-shoes-made-out-of-ocean-plastic-in-2017.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/14/adidas-sold-1-million-shoes-... https://www.triplepundit.com/2011/09/new-balance-newsky-sneaker-recycled-plastic-bottles/ https://www.triplepundit.com/2011/09/new-balance-newsky-snea... https://goodonyou.eco/9-ethical-sneaker-brands/ https://goodonyou.eco/9-ethical-sneaker-brands/
- not_kurt_godel 8y agoI would imagine it's possible to create landfills in areas that are 'geological material sinks' (lay-person made-up term) - i.e. places where particulate matter has a tendency to accumulate rather than diffuse elsewhere over time. Better to concentrate vast quantities of waste in isolated areas where it's relatively contained than let it pollute literally everywhere on earth.
- sp332 8y agoPlastic doesn't naturally gravitate towards oceans. If it's not dumped directly in an ocean or one of the rivers that flows into an ocean, it will be fine.
- ryacko 8y agoPlastic floats, the large surface area makes it likely it will be pushed into a river, and all water flows into the ocean, except for the water that leads to lakes or aquifers.
- swampthinker 8y agoWouldn't it be very effective to deploy this technology around the major plastic pollution sources instead?
- sp332 8y agoStopping the pollution from happening or cleaning up water in the rivers before it reaches the ocean will have a bigger impact over the long run. But neither of those can remove the plastic that is already in the ocean, which is what this project is for.
- josefx 8y agoUnless their cleanup efforts manage to outpace the poluters we would still need to stop the constant flow of garbage for this project to have any meaning.
- michelb 8y agoStopping the polluters is a much harder behavioural, but mostly political problem. I am 42, I don't think I will see a solution to that in my lifetime. I applaud anything that makes this problem more visible and tangible (pictures of that patch are not enough), and if Boyan has a shot at getting some plastic out after some iterations, awesome! If not, then this has been an inexpensive awareness campaign, showing that it is indeed a much harder problem then anyone thinks.
- sp332 8y agoWell, yeah. But there are other projects for that.
- SirLJ 8y agoThis project will never work or collect anything... For anyone interested, it was clear from the start that tHis is indeed a PR stunt designed to collect money... The only way to stop polluting is to start with a ban on single use plastics...
- macspoofing 8y agoOcean plastics are the result of mismanaged waste from third world countries, but the only solution is to ban 'single use' plastics.
- bcheung 8y agoThis article makes me think of the game Raft. I'm now wondering how easy it would be to expand the net using garbage collected from the net.
- clay_the_ripper 8y agoMaybe I’m the only one, but I like this project. Yes, we need to prevent plastic from going in in the first place, but what about al the plastic that’s already there? There’s a lot of it. Does this system address every single issue? No. (Like the plastic that’s more than 3 meters down). But to me this seems like an “and” project. Let’s prevent plastic from entering AND try to remove it. Let’s get rid of the top layer AND develop a solution for the lower depths. Let’s try this AND another idea. At least they are trying something rather than twiddling their thumbs and conducting studies and not taking action because the thing isn’t perfect. The oceans are in a dire situation and action needs to be taken. Maybe this thing doesn’t work. Maybe they have to start over. Maybe someone else comes up with something better. Great! Do that. People pointing out that it might harm marine life. Ok I get it. You know what else harms marine life? Damn near everything else humans put into the oceans too. At this point the oceans are basically screwed if someone doesnt start trying to fix something. And to the people pointing out that it’s a waste of 20 mil, come on. 20 mil is basically nothing and it’s no skin off your teeth. Better than money went to this than making more juceros or whatever other dumb ideas that get a lot more funding than 20 mil, and have no possibility of a net upside.
- glibgil 8y ago> Maybe this thing doesn’t work It doesn’t > Maybe they have to start over They spent $20M. They shouldn’t be allowed near money ever again > Maybe someone else comes up with something better Everyone who did nothing came up with something better. My $0 solution gets more plastic than this and leaves $20M available for other things
- eganist 8y ago> Everyone who did nothing came up with something better With that attitude, no research projects will ever go to production. As an aside, spending money doesn't destroy it. You talk as if some grave crime was committed... nah. People passionate about the environment (or at the very least, blue collar folks in need of work) likely earned a living supporting this project, something that wouldn't have happened if zero dollars were spent trying to solve the problem. The funding will continue only if we're willing to spend towards validating or invalidating new ideas; researchers just need to either rework or exclude this approach and explore others as different concepts succeed or fail.
- michaelbuckbee 8y agoLots of negativity here for this, but it sounds like a design /implementation issue and not necessarily something fundamental. Like anything it's not a silver bullet, but one small tool to help deal with the larger problem. Things like Baltimore's Trash Wheel in the Inner Harbor have prevented literally tons of waste from outflowing. They needed a few design iterations before it worked as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkQbcrzyAeE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkQbcrzyAeE
- irishcoffee 8y agoYeah that trash wheel doesn't run nearly as much as you'd think. It exists.
- jwitchel 8y agoIs it a waste of your time or your money when someone else picks up a can off the beach? Help. Don't help. But sneering at their effort is just mean. Bravo and +1 to all the engineers on this very excellent project.
- jacobwilliamroy 8y agoBeach plastic is different from ocean plastic. At the scale which the ocean cleanup intends to operate, removing plastics from the ocean is almost always worse than leaving it alone and sometimes just as effective as doing nothing. It sounds counter-intuitive, but it is the truth. This system will not remove 92% of the plastics in the gyre. It will neither remove nor reduce plastics which already contaminate the human food, air and water supplies. Its wide-scale, automated deployment will result in by-catch and contribute to the rising food-security issues throughout the pacific due to dwindling fish populations. The ocean is extremely fragile. The ocean, and the communities who depend on it are on the brink of irreversible collapse, and Mr. Slat really, truly, objectively, is not helping.
- kijin 8y agoSo what do you propose that we do? Even if everyone stopped throwing plastic into the water right now, it will not remove an ounce of plastic that's already in the water and killing the ecosystem. Instead of dismissing attempts like this with a hand wave, perhaps we should actually start calculating the amount of damage done by potential by-catch versus the damage avoided by removing X tons of plastic from the top Y meters of the water column. Or compare the amount of plastic this project will end up adding to the oceans with the amount it will remove in the meantime. It's okay to be naysayer if you have real numbers to back up your claims. It's not okay to throw around phrases like "Mr. Slat is really, truly, objectively not helping" when you don't have any numbers to back up your claims.
- chihuahua 8y agoJust use Katamari technology. Boom, problem solved.
- HillaryBriss 8y agothey're optimistic. they're calling it a success. they're motivated to keep working on this device. who knows?
- guelo 8y agoIf I had $20 mil for helping the oceans I would try to build a few miles of netting around the mouth of a polluting asian river. But I don't know how I'd pay for the continual maintenance and cleaning.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago> But I don't know how I'd pay for the continual maintenance and cleaning. Things like this should be paid from taxes.
- monk_e_boy 8y agoHave you seen the mouth of a river? I surf in one regularly (a very very small river) and there is no way a net would last more than a week. Plus boats, fishing, fish, birds etc etc
- duchenne 8y agoMost people believe that this garbage patch (aka plastic continent) looks like what is in their trash bin. The picture in the article reinforces this misconception: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/20/great-pacific-garbage-patch-20m-cleanup-fails-to-collect-plastic#img-2 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/20/great-pa... However, most of this plastic is actually so small and sparse that you cannot even see it. That makes cleanup really difficult. From wikipedia: > Disintegration means that much of the plastic is too small to be seen. In a 2001 study, researchers found concentrations of plastic particles at 334,721 pieces per km2 with a mean mass of 5.1 kg (11.3 lbs) per km2, in the neuston.
- kijin 8y agoMost of the small plastics come from the breakup of large plastics. By removing large plastics floating on the top, you can (at least theoretically) prevent more small plastics from being made.
- known 8y ago6.3 billion tons of plastic is to be recycled.
- austincheney 8y agoEffectively collecting micro-plastics (the real problem) will likely require new technology that provides an attractive field that resonates with plastics. Plastics are complex hydrocarbons (oils) so you would need to provide some sort of magnetic effect that energizes and attracts the hydrocarbons to a central point. This would be something that is chemically non-polar on both ends of a chemical chain, emits a high resonance electro-static field, and something that repels polar chemicals and anything with a covalent bonding. Essentially, it would be a static electricity anti-soap fixed to a point.
- Someone 8y ago”collecting micro-plastics (the real problem)” The real problem is getting them out of the water. I expect the solution to that will not be collecting them, but breaking them down faster. It wouldn’t surprise me if micro-organisms beat us to solving that problem, in particular for pure hydro-carbons.
- austincheney 8y agoPlastics breakdown naturally in water. This is why there are now observable quantities of plastics in all human water supplies including the water you drink, bathe in, and cook with. This is also why the bigger problem is micro-plastics, which are those sufficiently broken down microscopic particles. This is also the primary problem in the great Pacific garbage patch, the plastics you don't see. If you can consolidate these particles with some manner of attractive force you can extract them.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago> Plastics breakdown naturally in water. This is why there are now observable quantities of plastics in all human water supplies including the water you drink, bathe in, and cook with. Two meanings of the word "break down" here; I guess you mean plastic objects breaking down into smaller pieces, and GP meant hydrocarbon chains breaking down into smaller chains and possibly constituent atoms. The former is the source of the problem, the latter would be a solution.
- hevi_jos 8y agoIn other news: After writing a program, developer finds bugs!! With engineering problems are even worse than programming. you can expect setbacks on the field that you need to solve. Those guys are working on solving those issues. This alone earns my respect. Even if they fail, they will be taking more risks than those criticizing the project while doing nothing to improve the situation.
- solarengineer 8y agoI have been tracking them since early 2014, and I follow their video updates regularly. I'm surprised at how many scientists and experienced people are concerned about the booms harming marine life. If you see this video, you'll understand that they're sweeping and shepherding surface-level plastic in a boom. If a turtle or dolphin were to swim into the collection area, then the creature can easily swim out or beneath the booms. Indeed, non-living plastic too is slipping out beneath the boom (what this article itself infoms us!)! I recently saw their video [1] where they showed how they've been able to detect that some (not "all", like this article insinuates) plastic has slipped under the boom. They tried some things on the spot, like bringing the boom ends closer, raising the boom arms, etc. This is a video that they had themselves published, and is thereofre hardly a "scoop" or an exposé. See also their FAQ, that they update regularly. For e.g. they intend to visit each boom once in six weeks, cleaning up, revising future designs based on lessons learned, etc, thus preventing the boom from becoming a Fish Aggregating Device. Their techonology page [3] is also informative. I urge HN readers to please review the videos and the FAQ, and not just conclude based on one article. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1EAeNdTFHU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1EAeNdTFHU [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcRIE98y_UM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcRIE98y_UM [2] https://www.theoceancleanup.com/faq/# https://www.theoceancleanup.com/faq/# [3] https://www.theoceancleanup.com/technology/ https://www.theoceancleanup.com/technology/
- cultus 8y agoThis project cannot work. Here's some information written by an actual oceanographer: http://www.deepseanews.com/2014/07/the-ocean-cleanup-part-2-technical-review-of-the-feasibility-study/ http://www.deepseanews.com/2014/07/the-ocean-cleanup-part-2-... http://www.deepseanews.com/2016/06/the-ocean-cleanup-deployed-a-prototype-and-i-honestly-have-a-lot-of-questions/ http://www.deepseanews.com/2016/06/the-ocean-cleanup-deploye... In the marine community, this project is a punchline.
- coryfklein 8y ago> This project cannot work. This assessment is not supported by the links you posted. Here is a summary of the critiques you linked. * They are using RO-BOOMS, a proven tech since 1988 for oil cleanups * They are painted black, which makes them hard to see * When testing the booms at the Marin Facility, waves would cause gaps underneath where garbage could pass through the barrier * They haven't tested them yet to see whether they collect plastic * The author couldn't find the public proposal * Many of the above comments are now admitted to be out of date * Author believes the momentum from the project could lead to real change but some changes are needed for a workable solution * Author desires transparency * No scientific reviews have been done on the project * Sections of the feasibility study require editing * The feasibility study doesn't account for extreme ocean currents * The feasibility study doesn't prove it will work * Doesn't capture plastic at depth * Further testing and analysis is needed * Biofouling hasn't been solved yet * Available advanced computer simulation software was not used in the design * Some sections of the feasibility study are out of date due to design changes * More than one ship will be required * Several design hurdles haven't been overcome yet * Legal issues regarding bycatch haven't been resolved While certainly many of these are valid, they are also pretty much what one would suspect from early stage modelling, prototyping, and testing. The authors you linked actually deem the project worth the time of providing professional critical feedback, and they believe that the momentum can lead to real workable solutions.
- _Codemonkeyism 8y agoI think we (they) learn a lot, next try will be better and we need to learn how to clean up the oceans and currently we have no clue. Would there be cheaper ways to learn what works? Perhaps.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- casper345 8y agotl;dr More funding for this program!! It is hard for most people to grasp the engineering hardship and complexity to work in the ocean especially with only 20 million$ to solve a massive problem. Just a thought, but we were able to land a man on the moon before ever reaching the Challenger Deep (lowest recorded point in ocean). This team needs more funding in order to achieve this or even just make a dent.