A lot of folks over on Digg were very skeptical of the existence of the North Pacific Trash Gyre. They want to know: why are there no photos of floating heaps of trash? Why can’t you see the giant trash island the size of Texas on Google Earth?
When I learned of the trash gyre, I was equally skeptical, due to common misconceptions that get perpetuated in mainstream media articles. The most common misconception is that the trash pile is like an island, or a dense pile like this one in San Diego Harbor. It’s not packed in as tight as that - it’s more like a dense collection of tiny floating pieces of plastic, most of which are not on the surface. A big container ship or naval vessel going through there would probably not notice much out of the ordinary - after all, there is some degree of plastic trash floating on the surface all over the world.
To really get a sense of how much plastic is in there, you have to do a trawl, which entails dragging a net with a bucket on the end behind your boat. Here’s a photo of a bongo trawl taken off of southern California. (Thanks, Barbeau lab! SIO power!) And here’s a photo of what a normal bongo trawl should produce - lots of zooplankton, a few invertebrates, and the occasional small fish.
Now, contrast this with the results of a trawl from the North Pacific Gyre. Here’s the bongo net being hauled up - see how the ocean looks normal? But the contents - plastic, plastic, and more plastic.* When all that plastic collects somewhere, you get beaches like this one in the NW Hawaiian Islands.
For this reason, the trash gyre would be very, very hard to clean up. The plastic is so small, and so scattered, that it would take high-intensity trawling similar to that for shrimp. And shrimp trawling kills 10 pounds of non-targeted life (sharks, turtles, fish, you name it) for every pound of shrimp gathered. (Yes, Forrest Gump lied to you - for some reason they didn’t want drowned turtles next to Tom Hank’s angelic self.) The mortality caused by trying to remove all the trash in the gyre would probably be similar. We’re just going to have to live with it and try to prevent it from getting any bigger.
*Note: some of these results are from manta trawls intead of bongos - it’s just a differently shaped net.
November 28, 2007 at 10:25 pm
http://indigosociety.com/9829-dream-share-9829-indigo-island-9829-t2869.html
December 3, 2007 at 9:01 am
I just noticed this Indigo Society proposal to weld the trash into a floating utopia. I’m not going to comment on either Indigo Societies or the fate of utopias, but please do refer to the 5th paragraph above where I explain why it would be difficult and environmentally damaging to try to remove small pieces of trash from the ocean. Unless you want to kill 10 lbs of sea life for every pound of plastic, you’ll have to build your brave new island out of something else.
January 1, 2008 at 2:28 am
I am sorry, but after reading several articles that state there is very little marine life nor nutrition in the gyre, due to its nature, i am confused about your figures, Miriam. There is no dispute that the north pacific gre is created by the Pacific’s currents. Also, there is research that has revealed that marine life avoid the gyre due to it’s lack of nutrients, which is a byproduct of the ocean current. As a result there is very little in the way of the food chain inhabiting the gyre area. The ratio you use of 10lbs of marine life to 1 lb of plastic surely would not apply to the gyre area if there is little sea life there in the first place. I do agree that the pollutants would be hard for the indigo society, or anybody for that matter, to remove. But i do believe that mother nature will need a hand in this and more marine life ,in the long run, would be saved if the trash was removed verses how many pounds would be sacrificed by trawling.
January 2, 2008 at 1:20 pm
[...] The Oyster’s Garter…re:satellite images of the Gyre and more [...]
January 2, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Luckyreow - You are right that the gyres are a marine desert with relatively little life. However, like a terrestrial desert, the life that is there is specially adapted to living in a harsh environment and is often really cool. For example, the ocean sunfish, which eats jellyfish, can be found there. You are incorrect that there is little food chain. Due to the lack of nutrients, the food chain is actually very long because it is based on the tiniest of plankton.
Regarding trawling the gyre, I do not quite understand your argument - if there is little marine life in the gyre, why not leave the plastic where it is? It is true that the 10:1 ratio from shrimp fisheries may not apply in the gyre - it would be interesting to do an experimental trawl and see. However, remember that turtles and albatrosses, which have been the plastic-eating poster children, are also hit hardest by high-intensity trawling since they get caught in the net and drown.
January 2, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Ok, so there is some stuff floating on the ocean. If you told me that there was a big sandy spot in the mid-latitudes of Africa with little life and some plastic, I wouldn’t care. Now we find that there is some desert in the Pacific with little life and some plastic. Whoopdy do.
January 3, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Well, I suppose apathy is your prerogative. Here’s why I care about the huge amount of trash in the gyre:
1) Direct killing of sealife. Though the gyre is not productive, there is still lots of special critters that live there. Albatrosses has been hit hardest since it can’t distinguish between trash and fish.
2) Transportation of toxins and invasive species to one of the last true wildernesses. Plastic soaks up PCBs like a sponge, and invasive invertebrates cling to debris. Debris also aggregates fish, which like to swim in shadows, which increases the chance of toxins accumulating up the food chain. That is bad for people.
3) Morality. Letting tons and tons of plastic float about in the Pacific is bad, tacky, and the equivalent of people who smear their feces on bathroom walls. I don’t think we can clean it up, but at least we stop putting more in.
January 4, 2008 at 3:23 am
I agree with Miriam as to some of the major concerns regarding the gyre and it’s pollutants. However, I am having a hard time accepting that nothing can be done about it, except not to make the situation worse. Unfortunately, when cleaning up an environmental disaster, such the plastic in this gyre, there will be a negative effect on another aspect of the environment or wildlife. I probably don’t fully understand what the barriers are to such a task, but if some marine life is lost in the process it may be for the greater good.
January 7, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Best compilation of general info I’ve seen on this yet … thanks.
Strange that some wouldn’t care — where do they think their seafood comes from?
January 8, 2008 at 3:30 pm
and maybe people need to be reminded that this mess, which could survive for (hundreds of?) thousands of years, was all created in the past 50 or so!
are we prepared to live with this trashpile becoming 2, 3, … times as large in coming decades?
i hope not
January 8, 2008 at 6:38 pm
ESJ, to be painfully accurate, your seafood probably does not come from the North Pacific Gyre. There are relatively few big fish out there because it’s not very fertile. But personally, I rather like having albatrosses and turtles in the world, and I bet a lot of people agree.
John, I agree. One easy way to stop the gyre from growing is to stop using plastic shopping bags yourself and to support banning them altogether. Thanks for stopping by!
January 9, 2008 at 6:20 pm
I have three words that will help this go further: Education, Education, Education! So many people do not know what a problem plastics are - both in the developed and developing nations (I noticed that in parts of Mexico its almost rude to deny a plastic bag when offered - very strange). Distrubuting leaflets to school children with good, clear pictures and descriptions of the plastic problem is going to be my new years resolution. Also, where is the media on this one? Whatever happened to the FCCs promise that a portion of television will be for the public good - yeah right! Ok - save fighting the FCC for 2009…Thanks for the great website!
January 25, 2008 at 6:51 am
First off, thank you for a great explanation of this problem. Before I found this article, I did alot of searching for more about this, including pictures, but only could find the map with drawing of the approx size of this thing. I was starting to think this thing was a hoax or at best not much of a problem. I think the media is doing great harm to this cause, as they do with most things.
As to the idea of getting people to reduce thier plastic consumption, it would be a bit impractical to completely stop using plastics. I’d say, instead of scaring kids with more sensationalized facts (see the media) we might be better served to teach recycling. The plastic bag issue is a favorite scare thing, although alot of poeple don’t realize that they can be recycled with your other plastics. I use plastic bags from my grocery store all the time. Then they go right into the recycle bin for round 2.
Have a nice day, yall
January 25, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Jeff - I’m glad you enjoyed the post. In most states, plastic bags cannot be placed in the curbside recycling bins. Here in CA, they must be returned to grocery stores. This makes rates of recycling extremely low (only 1-3% according to this site). I don’t think that people need to stop using plastics altogether - I like my mixing bowls & contact lenses! - but if you’ve got to lug your plastic bags back to the store to be recycled anyway, why not just use a reusable bag? That way your groceries are easier to carry & you’re reducing your carbon footprint (since making & recycling plastic bags takes energy).
January 31, 2008 at 3:49 am
Excellent post on this major issue Mriam.
You readers maybe interested in the following as well;
1. Expeditions into the gyre and in the Atlantic; http://environmentdebate.wordpress.com/2007/05/17/the-dead-zone-plastic-fcuktastic/
2. Visuals; http://environmentdebate.wordpress.com/2007/11/02/images-video-from-the-north-pacific-gyre/
January 31, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Good discussion. I’m putting a foldable little shopping bag in my coat pocket right now so that I can avoid using plastic bags and paper bags as much as possible. I also carry them in my car for shopping, but I’m going to be more diligent about using them.
I think there must be a way we can clean up some of the gyre. Nothing is truly impossible. I am concerned about the “developing” world. We in the US have the riches and “luxury” to be thinking about these issues, as daily survival is not such a big deal for most of us. But China, India, etc….. as they become more and more “like us” they will be polluting like us, too. We MUST lead the way in changing our ways!
March 7, 2008 at 9:38 am
I think that plastic is a problem even in the ocean. My thoughts after researching about the ocean are that we should deff/ clean the plastic up and perhaps recycle some of it. I don’t think the U.S.A. is resp. for all of the plastic I think we should deff/ get other countries involved in the clean up process.It might damage some ocean life now, but the over all results should be rewarding both for human beings and marine life for years to come. We can open plastic recycling centers in California and in other areas, and countrie to help open jobs and contribute to helping the earth. These special recycling centers will only deal with plastic from the ocean not regular products from a weekly pick up. (Not until the project is complete)
March 9, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Thank you for bringing this information together for reader! One thing that I thought of while reading the comments is that I do not think that people really get how the food chain in the ocean actually works. Plastic photodegrades (it will never, ever biodegrade — it simply breaks down until it is finally molecule-size, but it is still a polymer) until it basically mimics zooplankton. Currently, in the gyre, the mass of plastic bits is 6 times the mass of zooplankton. Zooplankton are the basis of the entire food chain. Filter feeders, like jellyfish, consume huge amounts of zooplankton. Then other creatures eat the filter feeders. They are in turn consumed by other predators. And the process continues. Many of the fish that we target for commercial fisheries are relatively high on that food chain, and it does not matter that they are not caught in the gyre. The food chain starts in places like the gyre — the same vortex of currents that concentrate flotsam (floating trash) also concentrate zooplankton. That makes it a good place for the predators of zooplankton to congregate. The problem is that non-organic substances — like polymers, heavy metals, etc. — cannot be digested and accumulate in the organisms that eat them until they are, in turn, consumed. They are then stored in that animal’s body for the rest of its life … and so on. This is why extremely high levels of mercury were recently recorded in bluefin tuna in New York City — bluefin tuna are long-lived and peak predators, so they end up concentrating large amounts. And guess who eats the ocean’s peak predators? That’s right: you and me. As far as I have been able to find, no one is doing any big studies about polymers in peak predators, but it should be a concern. Worse yet, as has been mentioned here already, plastic absorbs toxins (like PCBs), which are also passed through the food chain.
Because of the future threat that even the current plastic concentration in the gyre poses, and because of the cumulative effect of the toxicity, I am in favor of the international community studying clean-up options. (I do think that some bio-mass loss is acceptable in the process, but just how much is where the studies need to come in to the equation.) In the meantime, I think stopping plastic pollution is imperative. So, yes, reduce the demand for plastic (avoid it or reuse it), commit to plastic recycling (keep it out of the landfills, and reduce the amount of virgin plastic being produced from petroleum), and encourage the transition to bio-based plastics (buy it, support it).
Thanks again for bringing this topic to light!
March 9, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Good comment Donita. Yes, less packaging and if packaging is necessary, biodegradable packaging is the way to go. For example; http://blog.environmentsolutions.co.uk/?p=86
But there are many companies out there doing this and they must be supported. Using corn for corn starch in biodegradable packaging is far better than using it for ethanol! Still better of course that corn is used for food products.
March 28, 2008 at 12:24 pm
[...] more about the Gyre here, here, here and [...]
April 9, 2008 at 5:50 am
this is well funny i throw loads of used tyres in the sea all the time lol
April 14, 2008 at 5:51 am
this is a great site to find out about the sea if you want to keep in touch email me at annatillman_91@yahoo.com
April 14, 2008 at 7:58 am
this is just fucked up do something someone
April 22, 2008 at 4:34 pm
[...] Why there are no pictures of the North Pacific Trash Gyre [...]
April 24, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Seems like leaving it there is a bad idea. The plastic is degrading down to molecule size. It is toxic and will continue to leach into the stream of life. That along with the other pollutants we know about creates an extremely hostile environment for all living things. Consider this: If you ate only natural organic foods, and drank only distilled water, upon death, your body would still qualify as toxic waste by EPA definition. Regardless what you consume or where you live, you cannot avoid it. The entire cycle is compromised. We need to address it on all levels and to the exclusion of any and all priorities that may compete for our attention and resources. Is there nobody in charge? How could such a situation have ever been allowed to become manifest? There is no leadership, only rhetoric and greed.
April 24, 2008 at 7:32 pm
[...] day! | Tags: Self-Referential | Sorry for this totally bragging post, but Miriam’s 2007 post on why it’s difficult to photograph the North Pacific Gyre and why it will be difficult to [...]
May 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Timmy, from April 14,
You’re right. It’s VERY fucked up. But rather than sit back & say “do something, someone”, take a second and realize that someone is you. It’s all of us.
If everyone was diligent in recycling as much as they could, including collecting #3 - #6 plastics at your home & taking them to a recycling center, the difference would be astounding. Also, you can’t recycle #7 plastics. Stop using products that package in #7 and let the company know that’s why you’re no longer purchasing their product. If enough people do it, they’ll change. They might not care about sea life, but they sure care about company revenues. There’s a wonderful iced tea product sold in gallon jugs, and I recently learned they were #7 plastic containers. That night, I sat down and wrote the letter (Dear ‘company named after a state in the southwest that starts with an A’) and they no longer have my business.
It’s clear that our government isn’t going to lead the charge toward environmental responsibility. It’s truly on us all as individuals to make a herculean effort to change our consumption and disposal habits, but also to spread the word. So many people simply have no idea about the rapidly declining planet, no concept of their impact on the environment or what that means in the long run.
If you want to make a difference, spend some time researching the products you use. What do they use for packaging? What goes into their products, and how bad is that for the environment? For example - hybrid cars save gas, but do you know how much energy is used to create the batteries or how toxic the “ingredients” and by-products are? Check it out.
- Recycle batteries. Don’t throw them out.
- Recycle light bulbs. IKEA takes them
- Recycle plastic grocery bags. Most large grocery stores take them back
- Buy “green” products for your house, such as bamboo flooring & furniture. It can look great and is practically renewable overnight
- BUY AMERICAN-MADE PRODUCTS! Aside from all of our money pouring into the Chinese economy, think of the amount of fuel it takes to send a cargo ship across the ocean. I was in a Dollar Store & saw a bag of polished stones - made in China. ROCKS! Shipped across the sea & sold for $1. And why the HELL are my everyday produce choices shifting to those grown in China? It takes a month to get across the ocean. Yeah, nice and fresh. PLUS - HELLO - THEY DON’T CARE IF IT’S SAFE TO EAT.
- Recycling one beer can saves enough energy to run a home computer for 3 hours.
I could rave for hours about this stuff, but the point is it’s up to YOU and YOU and YOU and YOU x 6 billion and ME. That’s the bottom line. The government won’t make companies change their ways, but the consumers sure can! Don’t try to change everything at once, but start somewhere - like finding out where the closest recycling center is & seeing what they take. You’ll be very surprised at what you end up saving to recycle (and more so the amount of trash you generate).
It’s up to us - it really is. If our generations don’t make the changes, we run a substantial risk of mother nature closing up shop for a long, long time.
SPREAD THE WORD!
May 6, 2008 at 12:52 am
Well said Timmy!
Btw, aren’t there door collections in your area for recycling?
May 8, 2008 at 10:28 am
Someone asked why this is even a problem. Lets not forget that the amount of plastics in circulation will forever INCREASE because of simple laws of exponential growth in population. Even an increase in recycling and concurrent reduction in present consumption rates (admirable, necessary goal) won’t completely help, unless it were an unprecedentedly massive paradigm shift in living style–the oft-reviled powerdown. One can only hope that peak oil and related resource extraction crashes will save us from a materialistic suicide.
May 22, 2008 at 12:32 am
“floating pieces which are not on the surface” You lost some credibility with that.
May 22, 2008 at 8:36 am
Newton - different kinds of plastic have different densities, and encrusting growth can also make them more dense. Thus, pieces of plastic can be suspended beneath the surface. I suppose they are not technically floating, but neither are they sinking.
May 29, 2008 at 6:14 am
Floating certainly does not mean the plastic has to be on top of the sea’s surface! Don’t balloons float “IN” the atmosphere? Plastic can floatatany depth in the water column and if it goes down it is sinking and if it goes up it is rising. If it stays at the same depth it is floating!
June 6, 2008 at 9:26 am
[...] does the Great Pacific Garbage Patch look like? Plastic soup. Miriam Goldsten from the Oyster’s Garter wrote a great explanation [...]
June 9, 2008 at 2:40 pm
[...] bag measurements Great blog article refering to the misconception that it’s an island, Why There Are No Pictures of the North Pacific Trash Gyre by Miriam Goldstein. Why blogging is great- she takes it on with good references and thoughtful, [...]
June 14, 2008 at 4:06 am
[...] 6, 2008 by Dr Benway From the Oyster’s Garter: The most common misconception is that the trash pile is like an island… It’s not packed in [...]
June 18, 2008 at 5:29 pm
where are the fricken asshole pictures????????
June 24, 2008 at 12:08 am
I have been boycotting “disposable” plastic products for 18 months. Started cos I hated what it was doing to environmnet but as I find out more, worry about what it might be doing for me. I think it is very foolish to make throw away stuff from a product that lasts for ever. Plastic is great but not for one use stuff. I have sourced lots of plastic free alternatives. You might find them useful. go to http://www.plasticisrubbish.wordpress.com
June 24, 2008 at 12:12 am
[...] Why are there no photos? Oysters garter has the best answer [...]
July 20, 2008 at 1:10 am
I doubt there is no visual sign of the gyre on google earth because they amp the seas and oceans with a different technique, you can tell by the way they look, you can’t see the surface, or waves, or ships - only around and nearer land where there is more conventional photo mapping. It takes a lot of money to map an ocean with a sattelite, they prioritise it to the land. But I’m sure there will be an shot somewhere for scientific reasons.
Check out http://www.morsbags.com for ways to reduce your p[lastic bag usage.
July 27, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Janet made a comment back in Jan. 08 about plastic bags in emerging economies like China and India and the fear that they will make the same mistakes that we have in the industrialized world.
There is an excellent 1 hour documentary about plastic bags and unfortunately I don’t know the exact title. It may even have been a CBC production. Perhaps some of you who are more savy than I am could find it out there on the web.
Anyway, one bit that I remember about India was that they have put restrictions on the weight of plastic bags that can be used, thereby attempting to eliminate the flimsy, single use bags that we are being fed at our stores. They actually have a special police unit whose ONLY job is to go to the markets and fine or arrest merchants who are using bags that cannot be reused.
Also, I just heard something interesting from a friend who is ordering (wholesale for the Green Party - Ontario) re-useable bags made from recyled plastic . The cost of that recyled plastic material to make the bags (which is only available FROM China, by the way) has just jumped 25% literally overnight because China has banned plastic bags.
I think we will find that the emerging economies will only make SOME of the same mistakes we did (and are still making) because they will actually learn from our poor example. Also the speed that they are going through the growth/learning curve is greatly excellerated. Their scientists already know what our scientists took decades to figure out ie that plastic doesn’t biodegrade. That even when it becomes nearly invisible, it’s still there!!! Their economists know that they will implode under the weight of the environmental impact of their growth if they do not handle it AS THEY GROW. They all know that they have been the environmental dumping ground of the West for the last few decades and so, not only do they have to clean up their messes, they have to clean up a good portion of our crap too. Our great leaders simply downloaded most of our toxic materials into the emerging economies rather than go to the trouble and expense of cleaning up after ourselves. (Watch the excellent documentary, “Manufactured Landscapes” or search out info on what the world does with it’s decommissioned ocean freighters.)
Another factor that comes into play is the relative level of democracy or lack thereof. A dictatorship can change the rules very, very quickly and enforce the change with terrible power. Democracies (which are wonderful and far preferred, of course) are incredibly slow to change. The speed of change for us has increased a bit with the advent of the internet but it’s still very slow. I believe that vast amounts of important data are being suppressed, watered down and camiflauged because it’s politically unpopular and near impossible to sell to the mainstream West.
While these two examples of change are only a drop in the ‘Solution Bucket’ (and there’s so much more to it than grocery bags!!), it shows an early awareness and political will that is light years ahead of us in the WEST.
The mainstream of the West will not change more than the window dressings (ie grocery bags) until it hits them in the money!!! That’s when ‘the environmental issues’ become real. I predict that the skyrocketing price of oil will do more to change our lifestyles in the next couple of years than all the protests, treehugging, letter writing, blogging etc. has done in the last 40 years put together. Harsh, I know. And I certainly don’t want to take any glory away from the early enviro-warriors. They blazed a trail against incredible odds… literally voices in the wilderness, and we get to walk comfortably along their path in our organic, unbleached cotton T’s… that don’t cost any much than regular T’s because they’re made in Honduras by slave labourers while their children scavenge in the dumps.
But that’s another rant! Sorry.
July 29, 2008 at 9:49 am
Just to add a little progress update on something here in the UK. A grocery chain called M&S has had a bag surcharge of 5 pence for 6 weeks now and reports a drop in their use of 80%! Charging for them works. ‘Life-time’ bags are sold for 10 pence but were given away for free at first as a part of their promotion.
August 3, 2008 at 12:52 pm
If there really are these underwater islands of thrash, of which I still havent seen a solid picture of yet, just a bunch of loosely scattered trash not unlike my teenagers room, Than there is no doubt that we need to “dredge” all this stuff up. We cant simply stick our heads in the sand abvout this and pretend its not there… we do enough of that and ignorance is onyl bliss for the short term… we need to help mother nature clean herself up… after all we were the ones to dirty her up in the first place…We are having the same debate about the Hudson river in Upstate NY, and to ignore these problems is to our detriment
August 9, 2008 at 11:49 am
[...] The Oyster´s Garter, Oceanographic Research Vessel Alguita, Wikipedia, L.A. Times, Best Life. Tags: [...]
September 2, 2008 at 1:29 pm
i guess when the time comes that we can see a photo highlighting this, or google earth shows the magnitude of such a catastrophe, it’ll be too late for any damage control..
sad, but then again, nature always wins..
September 18, 2008 at 11:50 pm
[...] to keep them healthy and beautiful. Trash is an unbelievably big problem in the ocean (think the size of Texas big) and its critters (like the Laysan albatross). But you can help - check out this video about what [...]
September 23, 2008 at 1:39 pm
First off thanks a lot for posting this article. It cleared up some questions I had about this problem. From previous articles I had envisioned some sort of floating island of bottles. It would be interesting to have divers take pictures of the high concentration of plastics just below the surface.
The second part of my response deals with the trawling debate. I think trawling should be considered as a viable way to clean up this area. Trawling nets can be outfitted with turtle and other large by-catch excluders. It would be an expensive and massive project, but I believe it needs to be done. Also funding needs to go into research to keep this from happening again.
October 3, 2008 at 9:12 am
Your idea of doing nothing other than leaving it and working to stop it from getting larger, is frankly not good enough. While the plastic breaks away and deteriorates, the sea and airlife that is further endangered just increases. The numbers of life that would be targeted should we try to destroy this garbage heap would recover, and while I am not normally in favor of random destruction, I think that in this case there is not enough sea life being supported by this garbage pit to justify leaving it alone.
October 12, 2008 at 12:22 pm
paper shopping bags are 7 times more polluting than plastic ones (see entire supply chain (reports at Ilog)). Please let’s be a little more German, and bring our canvas and recycled bags, and used glass bottles and crates to the supermarket, and STOP creating a market for any single use plastic packaging. I do, it’s not that hard. I like ecosystems too, Miriam. They are bigger and more imporatant than I am.
Hell, if you love Soda, get a SodaClub soda maker and the syrups. http://www.sodaclub.com/sodaclub.html
I have one- we all love it, and our friends are buying them now too (this is SF…). It’s way better for my kids too, who want the status with their friends of drinking soda, but I control the syrup type and amounts, and no longer buy the single use plastic bottles that eventually go to the gyre.
October 28, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Well, this explanation makes my solution to the problem a bit more challenging. I have this concept — the POWPAP (Pacific Ocean Waste Plastics Abatement Project) that involves somehow collecting the plastic waste in the Gyre and using Thermal Depolymerization (TDP) on-site to convert it into fuel oil, which can be used to power the TDP processing, with any surplus being shipped to buyers. I suppose some sort of filter system needs to be devised — one which will only entrap plastic particles and spare the life of larger aquatic creatures. It is said that cleaning up the GPGP would be the equivalent of vacuuming the entire United States. Yet I believe that a clever-enough filter system can be engineered whereby a dent can be made in the GPGP, reducing its size by perhaps 10% over the course of 3 years. However, this is a job for an engineer, not a dreamer like myself. Preventing the source of the plastic pollution is crucial to such a plan actually working, I believe.
October 31, 2008 at 12:15 am
I’ve got a few questions…
Isn’t plastic a petroleum based polymer? And hasn’t there been successful research in developing a bacterium that consumes crude oil?
Why don’t we take it a step further and design one that will infect and consume this plastic nonsense… after the plastic is gone, there’s not much chance of it spreading to the mainland…, so there is minimal environmental impact.
I suppose heat generated by massive bacterial colonies might be a factor, but not a very important one.
November 10, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Every time I go scuba diving, I come back with pockets full of garbage. I just returned from Thailand where the beaches are covered in trash. The locals don’t always clean them up because more will wash up on the next tide. I can only imagine what the gyre looks like. We’re the only species that fouls our home so badly it will eventually kill us. I’ll have a video on You Tube (under LindaMermaid) shortly showing just one short stretch of beach I saw.
We need to make ALL plastics recyclable and make it a crime not to do so (oh boy, more government!) If it were more profitable to recycle, this wouldn’t be an issue, would it? People would be fighting over all those lost flip-flops!
Hey Stephen King, how ’bout a story about scientists developing a plastic eating bacteria that mutates and eats people too?