4 ms·

"Scam" is unfair, at least if directed towards motivations. The whole thing is entirely well-meaning. But it's yet another consequence of the emerging pop cultu

"Scam" is unfair, at least if directed towards motivations. The whole thing is entirely well-meaning. But it's yet another consequence of the emerging pop culture of stupidity (the rebellion against expertise, no-knowledge crowd-funding, etc). Everyone in the maritime world always knew it would never work because it was based on a naive kid's brain dump. For fuck's sake, the initial plan was to anchor the bloody thing! Slat's excellent intentions don't equip him to design & manage a $20mil project.

cultus 8y ago
I would agree that it is unfair, except as I point out they deliberately ignore or attack critics, and do not offer any actual valid scientific arugments in return. This pattern includes ignoring or even demeaning scientists and engineers who dare criticize them (including quite sexist behavior towards some female scientists). They do this while raking in many millions. This demonstration project uses 30-year old boom technology, and would very quickly fail in the open ocean (as a previous attempt did). So, either they are so blissfully ignorant of the challenges of what they are trying to do (literally harder than sending humans to Mars) and are continuing to raise funds out of the best intentions, or they are scamming. For a project that seems to rely almost exclusively on pointing out that the founder is young, I'm guessing the second one.
- crispinb 8y ago
  My personal threshold for claiming dishonest motivations is higher than yours. I'd require, at a minimum, specific & direct evidence re the individuals involved, whereas the childish defensiveness you've come across is perfectly explicable as part of the general ignorant pop culture that encouraged the misguided project in the first place. Anyway, that aside, we're totally on the same page re the merits of the project. It's a terrible waste of the good intentions (& resources) of the donors, and can only lead to yet more cynicism.
- solarengineer 8y ago
  I don't know about the sexist behaviour, do you have any references? Let us not rush to allege that a project is likely to be a scam because the founder is young. The Trillion Trees campaign is also largely by really young people. The Ocean Cleanup folks don't harp so much about the founder's age. There's a whole team working there, and I haven't heard any grumblings from the team of resentment about him getting all the attention. As for scientific documentation, here is their feasibility study: https://www.theoceancleanup.com/fileadmin/media-archive/Documents/TOC_Feasibility_study_lowres_V2_0.pdf https://www.theoceancleanup.com/fileadmin/media-archive/Docu...
  - cultus 8y ago
    I'd rather not go into details on the sexist attitudes, but let's just say there is a pattern of talking down or ignoring the credentials of female scientists. The feasibility study is BS. It only convinced the media, no one in the marine community. They also gave the scientists they asked to "review" it literally 24 hours to do so. It is pretty hard to see how it was a good faith effort. Here is some information written by an actual oceanographer. 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... 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-... The second article is an in-depth explanation of all the scientific and engineering problems with the prototype.
krageon 8y ago
How do we know it is well-meaning? It's a project that has taken in a significant amount of money, that apparently people with actual knowledge are aware won't change a thing. It feels good to donate to it sure, but you have to wonder about the people running it given these facts.
riskable 8y ago
Why would anchoring a debris collection platform be a bad idea? Water flows and currents in certain areas can be quite predictable. Something like one of those anemones that sits at the edges of of sea shelfs collecting organic matter as it passes by... Relying on the current.
- notatoad 8y ago
  i don't really know anything about this, but my first guess would be that dropping an anchor to the depth required in the middle of the pacific ocean is completely impractical
- crispinb 8y ago
  As notatoad notes: it's entirely impractical. There's no such thing as anchoring in the depths (3-5000m IIRC) prevailing in the Pacific gyre hosting the 'garbage patch'. This alone would require a revolution in marine engineering. The frankly silly idea was quickly walked back, but it was an early & vivid demonstration of the hapless naiveity underlying the whole enterprise.

cultus 8y ago

I would agree that it is unfair, except as I point out they deliberately ignore or attack critics, and do not offer any actual valid scientific arugments in return. This pattern includes ignoring or even demeaning scientists and engineers who dare criticize them (including quite sexist behavior towards some female scientists). They do this while raking in many millions. This demonstration project uses 30-year old boom technology, and would very quickly fail in the open ocean (as a previous attempt did). So, either they are so blissfully ignorant of the challenges of what they are trying to do (literally harder than sending humans to Mars) and are continuing to raise funds out of the best intentions, or they are scamming. For a project that seems to rely almost exclusively on pointing out that the founder is young, I'm guessing the second one.

crispinb 8y ago
My personal threshold for claiming dishonest motivations is higher than yours. I'd require, at a minimum, specific & direct evidence re the individuals involved, whereas the childish defensiveness you've come across is perfectly explicable as part of the general ignorant pop culture that encouraged the misguided project in the first place. Anyway, that aside, we're totally on the same page re the merits of the project. It's a terrible waste of the good intentions (& resources) of the donors, and can only lead to yet more cynicism.
solarengineer 8y ago
I don't know about the sexist behaviour, do you have any references? Let us not rush to allege that a project is likely to be a scam because the founder is young. The Trillion Trees campaign is also largely by really young people. The Ocean Cleanup folks don't harp so much about the founder's age. There's a whole team working there, and I haven't heard any grumblings from the team of resentment about him getting all the attention. As for scientific documentation, here is their feasibility study: https://www.theoceancleanup.com/fileadmin/media-archive/Documents/TOC_Feasibility_study_lowres_V2_0.pdf https://www.theoceancleanup.com/fileadmin/media-archive/Docu...
- cultus 8y ago
  I'd rather not go into details on the sexist attitudes, but let's just say there is a pattern of talking down or ignoring the credentials of female scientists. The feasibility study is BS. It only convinced the media, no one in the marine community. They also gave the scientists they asked to "review" it literally 24 hours to do so. It is pretty hard to see how it was a good faith effort. Here is some information written by an actual oceanographer. 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... 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-... The second article is an in-depth explanation of all the scientific and engineering problems with the prototype.

krageon 8y ago

How do we know it is well-meaning? It's a project that has taken in a significant amount of money, that apparently people with actual knowledge are aware won't change a thing. It feels good to donate to it sure, but you have to wonder about the people running it given these facts.

riskable 8y ago

Why would anchoring a debris collection platform be a bad idea? Water flows and currents in certain areas can be quite predictable. Something like one of those anemones that sits at the edges of of sea shelfs collecting organic matter as it passes by... Relying on the current.

notatoad 8y ago
i don't really know anything about this, but my first guess would be that dropping an anchor to the depth required in the middle of the pacific ocean is completely impractical
crispinb 8y ago
As notatoad notes: it's entirely impractical. There's no such thing as anchoring in the depths (3-5000m IIRC) prevailing in the Pacific gyre hosting the 'garbage patch'. This alone would require a revolution in marine engineering. The frankly silly idea was quickly walked back, but it was an early & vivid demonstration of the hapless naiveity underlying the whole enterprise.