Not having known anything about this device, I wondered the same question. When someone talks about “cleaning oceans” my brain goes to the massive issue of “microplastic pollution.” Is there an answer out there for filtering microplastics without screwing up the plankton, krill, and other tiny lifeforms that make up the base of the oceanic foodchain? I have no idea.
Following the link above, the device in question appears to be focused on larger trash pieces than I was imagining. It doesn’t seem to filter tiny particulates at all.
So there’s two lines of thought here: 1) tiny organisms are probably surviving through this device. But also, 2) it only removes bulk trash (which is important in its own right and prevents larger plastic from breaking down in the water further, but it cannot remove existing microplastics.)
We’d still need to figure out something that can remove microplastics without harming microorganisms if we want to really tackle ocean pollution. So much life in the ocean depends on a healthy population of such creatures, that I’m struggling to understand why so many people have downvoted your valid concern. Removing large trash is good, but if the goal is “clean oceans,” it’s far from enough. There’s so much more trash that we can’t even see because it’s microscopic. But it fucks with ocean life throughout the food chain and shouldn’t be ignored.
Anyway, thank you for considering the “bigger picture.” It doesn’t look like many people are seeing this issue from the same angle, and too many would rather downvote comments they don’t understand than attempt to bridge the misunderstanding.
I think the downvotes are due to the “perfect is the enemy of good” argument they inadvertently make. I.e. because it’s not also collecting micro plastics, it’s not worth doing. It’s likely not intentional, but it’s a rapid killer of good, new ideas.
As for the micro plastics issue. The only viable way is to design/breed an organism (or organisms) that can consume and digest the plastics. A genetically modified krill might be able to do it, if not, bacteria.
It’s a massive challenge however. Not least proving that it’s safe. Once it’s loose in the oceans, putting that genie back in the bottle will be difficult.
At least dealing with some portion of the problem is a good start and we’re still inventing new methods of dealing with microplastics, so until nearly all the trash is gathered larger trash cleanup efforts are worthwhile. Apparently 92% of the mass is made up of larger objects, so these need addressed first anyways.
At least dealing with some portion of the problem is a good start
larger trash cleanup efforts are worthwhile.
I’m confused, where did I say anything to imply otherwise? I stated that this particular device doesn’t filter microplastics, as well as that microplastics are a huge problem that needs to be addressed. Which part of that implies that larger garbage pieces aren’t worth cleaning up? After all, larger pollution breaks down to produce smaller pollution (which I also stated.) Denying large pollution while acknowledging micropollution wouldn’t make any sense, so I’m not sure where this argument is coming from.
I’m reminded of that “Twitter” meme, where someone can’t talk about pancakes without people arguing that they must hate waffles. It’s just as absurd to assume that if someone is talking about microplastics, that means they’re fine with larger garbage.
This doesn’t prevent stuff like plankton from being “cleaned” too, and I feel that would cause ecosystem issues
More than the huge amount of trash floating there? I feel this is missing the forest for the trees
Yes, it could be. Plankton are crucial for many marine ecosystems. Without them, some ecosystems would collapse
It’s just something that needs to be studied and accounted for
Plankton is microscopic!!!
Read the link I posted.
The smallest Mr Trash Wheel can collect is a cigarette butt.
Not having known anything about this device, I wondered the same question. When someone talks about “cleaning oceans” my brain goes to the massive issue of “microplastic pollution.” Is there an answer out there for filtering microplastics without screwing up the plankton, krill, and other tiny lifeforms that make up the base of the oceanic foodchain? I have no idea.
Following the link above, the device in question appears to be focused on larger trash pieces than I was imagining. It doesn’t seem to filter tiny particulates at all.
So there’s two lines of thought here: 1) tiny organisms are probably surviving through this device. But also, 2) it only removes bulk trash (which is important in its own right and prevents larger plastic from breaking down in the water further, but it cannot remove existing microplastics.)
We’d still need to figure out something that can remove microplastics without harming microorganisms if we want to really tackle ocean pollution. So much life in the ocean depends on a healthy population of such creatures, that I’m struggling to understand why so many people have downvoted your valid concern. Removing large trash is good, but if the goal is “clean oceans,” it’s far from enough. There’s so much more trash that we can’t even see because it’s microscopic. But it fucks with ocean life throughout the food chain and shouldn’t be ignored.
Anyway, thank you for considering the “bigger picture.” It doesn’t look like many people are seeing this issue from the same angle, and too many would rather downvote comments they don’t understand than attempt to bridge the misunderstanding.
Edit: fixed typo
I think the downvotes are due to the “perfect is the enemy of good” argument they inadvertently make. I.e. because it’s not also collecting micro plastics, it’s not worth doing. It’s likely not intentional, but it’s a rapid killer of good, new ideas.
As for the micro plastics issue. The only viable way is to design/breed an organism (or organisms) that can consume and digest the plastics. A genetically modified krill might be able to do it, if not, bacteria.
It’s a massive challenge however. Not least proving that it’s safe. Once it’s loose in the oceans, putting that genie back in the bottle will be difficult.
At least dealing with some portion of the problem is a good start and we’re still inventing new methods of dealing with microplastics, so until nearly all the trash is gathered larger trash cleanup efforts are worthwhile. Apparently 92% of the mass is made up of larger objects, so these need addressed first anyways.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_Garbage_Patch
I’m confused, where did I say anything to imply otherwise? I stated that this particular device doesn’t filter microplastics, as well as that microplastics are a huge problem that needs to be addressed. Which part of that implies that larger garbage pieces aren’t worth cleaning up? After all, larger pollution breaks down to produce smaller pollution (which I also stated.) Denying large pollution while acknowledging micropollution wouldn’t make any sense, so I’m not sure where this argument is coming from.
I’m reminded of that “Twitter” meme, where someone can’t talk about pancakes without people arguing that they must hate waffles. It’s just as absurd to assume that if someone is talking about microplastics, that means they’re fine with larger garbage.
He was referring to the OP’s post that was worried about plankton because they didn’t read the link that was posted. He was agreeing with you.