4 ms·
> The Ocean Cleanup’s operations demonstrate that the elimination of the GPGP can be done at today’s level of performance in 10 years at a cost of $7.5bn > D
by abeppu 2y ago
> The Ocean Cleanup’s operations demonstrate that the elimination of the GPGP can be done at today’s level of performance in 10 years at a cost of $7.5bn
> Data and modelling indicate that the removal of the GPGP could be achieved in 5 years at a cost of $4bn
We should do this at either price point, but ... what's the difference here? If we can do it faster and cheaper, why put the higher price quote in the headline? Is the 'data and modeling' including some extrapolation that assumes performance will increase meaningfully once they're started at scale?
- aeturnum 2y agoI believe what they are saying is two fold: 1) We have been doing some cleaning and, based on our real results that we have recorded, we are saying it can be cleaned up for $7.5bn over 10 years. 2) Separately, we have also done some thinking and modeling about other approaches and we project that we could probably clean up the same area in less time for less money.
- abeppu 2y agoIf so, that's great, but I'd love to hear them say something about the other faster cheaper approaches in 2 rather than just dangle that they exist.
- aeturnum 2y agoYah, the press release is written in a confusing way. I wish they were more clear about where those two numbers are coming from but that is my read of what they are trying to say.