Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Ocean Cleanup

theoceancleanup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 53 posts

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#41

Post by patrickaljord »

Throwaway0812 wrote: post #11
valinor4 wrote: post #2

This idea is already very criticized. French article about it: http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2014/06/19/boyan-slat-machine-a-n...

I didn't see many good counterpoints in the article. 1. They argue the majority of the waste is small particles, and they refer to it as a 'plastic soup'. Are these particles not just larger plastic debris that has decomposed? Wouldn't keeping up with the larger debris help prevent the 'plastic soup' in the first place? 2. Second point, they say the project is too big of a challenge but believe it might work on a sma…

rue89 is a far left French news site so it isn't surprising that their solution is anti-consumerism and their skepticism directed at a private initiative is also not surprising as they tend to favor initiatives that come from the State only.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#42

Post by goshx »

wbhart wrote: post #10

I'm skeptical. Most of the plastics in his/her photos are visible. In the actual gyres, most plastics are microplastics, i.e. particles from cosmetics and clothes washing that have gone down the drain. There's a pinkie fingernail sized piece every couple of cubic metres or so. Definitely not visible. They also harbour life. How to remove the life and give it somewhere to live without upsetting the ecosystem?

The plastic killing those birds look very visible to me.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#43

Post by andrewflnr »

drewfrank wrote: post #6
wfunction wrote: post #4

If they could only make the email address optional, then I'd consider... there really is no good reason whatsoever to require an email address here for someone who isn't asking for a reward.

That strikes me as a pretty extreme reaction. If it's an issue you care about and you think it's a viable approach, you'd really withhold your contribution on the basis of a required email address?

It smells bad. If I'm not explicitly asking them to send me stuff, what are they going to do with it except send me stuff I didn't ask for, AKA spam. This particular project may well be an exception, but on today's internet that's a healthy reflex.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#45

Post by Retric »

Luyt wrote: post #20

There's a skeptoid episode about the Pacific Garbage Patch: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4132 "In 1988, Robert Day, David Shaw, and Steven Ignell submitted a report to NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) detailing the results of four years of sample collection and analysis of plastic fragments found floating in the Pacific Ocean. They found concentrations highest in the North Pacific Gyre. The auth…

First off 1988 is 26 years ago.

Second, 450 square meters is about 1/9th of an acre or a little under 5,000 square feet which is not actually that big. Also, you don't really get uniformity with floating debris it's a mix of high and low concentrations the real issue is what the average concentration because you could double the amount of debris and still have large gaps. More to the point they are sampling that area not fully straining 450 square meters.

PS: Not that I think this is an important issue, just trying to be clear.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#46

Post by devcpp »

nothiggs wrote: post #12

I don't know enough about the subject to have the pretence to judge whether it can work, what I do know is that: 1. It seems the naysayers are doing nothing to try and change the situation, but then again, history books aren't populated with names of critics... 2. A partial solution is better than no solution. It doesn't solve the problem of microscopic plastic parts ? So what ? It also doesn't solve world hunger and…

>It seems the naysayers are doing nothing to try and change the situation

You can thank the naysayers for serious research, otherwise people would just come up with stupid abstract ideas since no one would be skeptical or pessimistic.

I agree with your second point, but I also think we shouldn't rush for a temporary solution that would give people a feeling of "we have at least done something about this, now let's stop worrying about it". Startup culture shouldn't apply to public- or crowd-funded solutions.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#47

Post by jstsch »

jpalomaki wrote: post #30

Good idea. Is this a scam? Does not look like that. Can this be harmful? Probably not at least in this scale. Ok, here's my money. Test this and let me know if it worked. In general it is good to be sceptical, but sometimes it can also prevent good things from happening. I think it is better to just throw them some money (or ignore this) than spend time trying to find reasons why this would not work. It's not like we…

Fully agree, this is a serious problem and this seems to be one of the few potential solutions with lots of energy going into it, so let's give it a shot. They did quite a bit of research and they've gone way further than just 'concepts' or artist impressions.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#48

Post by wfunction »

drewfrank wrote: post #6
wfunction wrote: post #4

If they could only make the email address optional, then I'd consider... there really is no good reason whatsoever to require an email address here for someone who isn't asking for a reward.

That strikes me as a pretty extreme reaction. If it's an issue you care about and you think it's a viable approach, you'd really withhold your contribution on the basis of a required email address?

Because it wouldn't be the first time I'd have been bitten by making donations to organizations that kept begging for money through the contact information provided.

I have no idea if they plan to do this, but I suspect they might (otherwise why would they require an email address?) and the onus on them to prove they don't intend to do that. Claiming you want to do something good doesn't automatically win everyone's trust.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#49

Post by spyder »

wfunction wrote: post #4

If they could only make the email address optional, then I'd consider... there really is no good reason whatsoever to require an email address here for someone who isn't asking for a reward.

Yea, let's not support cleaning up the oceans because it requires and e-mail address.

Re: The Ocean Cleanup

#50

Post by mirehirefire »

yread wrote: post #24
Panoramix wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a reference for the main sources of microplastics? My understanding is that they are the result of larger chunks of plastic that just decompose in the oceans. By removing large plastic items we'd make a strong leap forward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microplastics It's even in toothpastes!

This is just ridiculous... We need a marketing campaign to shame companies that use these. We ban it or legally enforce labeling of products that use microplastics and create a negative sentiment towards it. Otherwise, this is going to spiral out of control. If we can manage to stop it like ozone depleting CFCs then we'll have a chance to fix this, despite the immense energy cost.
Post reply on HN