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

Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

nature.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 328 posts

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#221

Post by rocqua »

smileysteve wrote: post #75
julianlam wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure! Rail is nice, when the volume permits it. How would we supply the supermarket, though? A rail line would be unfeasible.

Rail construction and maintenance is super low cost compared to highway and interstates. The expensive part is buying new rightaways, a private company responsible for liabilities like trespassing, security, and runoff (all of which the highways get subsidized by the public) If the US spent a small percent of what it does on highways it could reactivate tracks that have shutdown since the 50s, rail towns would rise a…

I imagine interstate highways have slopes and curves that are too extreme for train. Specifically for high-speed rail.

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#222

Post by garblegarble »

neuronic wrote: post #189
maxerickson wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is freshwater usage? My water comes out of a Great Lake and substantially ends up back in it, about as clean as it came out. It's not used up. Some energy is consumed making it potable and pumping it around, and then treating it. Farms in the Midwest happen to catch a lot of rain, are they using freshwater in a different way than an almond orchard in California, or is it the same (my expectation is that the almo…

Don't make the mistake and rely on current rain. It's not funny how quickly moist regions can turn arid as a result of climate change. We have currently seen major droughts in Europe and it severely affects the ongoing energy crisis. A lot of power plants, nuclear and others, are in direct danger of not being able to be cooled anymore because you need RIVERS for that. And they need to be cool. Germany is currently ex…

>In France, rivers are too warm to cool plants. There needs to be water AND it needs to be cool. There is no nuclear power without water cooling.

Just for clarity for others, the reason the water needs to be cool is so that after being used for cooling it doesn't come out too hot and kill wildlife. French plants have applied to temporarily lift these restrictions[1] (which also is not great).

If this becomes a problem longer-term, it might be possible to build larger cooling reservoirs for the water prior to being released back into the river.

1: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/frances-asn-nuclear-reg...

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#223

Post by throwaway894345 »

airstrike wrote: post #108
causality0 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really weird how cars get a pass for so much. It's really weird how trucks get a pass from people who don't give cars a pass. If tire wear is proportional to road wear, the majority of tire-originating microplastics is from semi trucks, not commuter sedans.

The corollary to this argument is that most environmental issues routinely blamed on individual behavior pale in comparison to the externalities from industry and commerce People talk shutting off the faucet while brushing one's teeth but ~70% of global freshwater usage comes from agriculture and ~20% from industry, with municipalities accounting for only 10%

It’s a convenient distraction for people in industries that depend on externalized costs, and it indulges those prone to self-righteousness and judgment (e.g., people who moralize their transportation and diet). Heavy industry and pseudo-environmentalists are unusual bedfellows.

I distinctly remember when Teslas became popular, the reaction from environmental types was often frustration because apparently environmentalism is supposed to be about sacrifice and yet Tesla is allowing the unwashed masses to help save the planet. Similarly, when debating climate policy, some of the strongest opposition to carbon pricing would come from self-professed environmentalists who were repulsed by the idea of aligned incentives—environmentalism is a bout rejecting one’s own interests; if the cheap thing and the environmental thing are the same, how will the True Believer distinguish himself from the unwashed masses? There is a deep attachment to pennywise and pound foolish “personal responsibility” solutions.

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#224

Post by mschuster91 »

cycomanic wrote: post #131
formvoltron wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rail idea is good. It's too bad rail is so expensive to make compared to roads. Imagine if all roads were instead rail lines, computer controlled. Would make self driving a lot easier to solve. No tire dust... Maybe if robots could lay the tracks down. OK this idea is out there, but it doesn't seem too crazy tbh.

> The rail idea is good. > It's too bad rail is so expensive to make compared to roads. Is that actually true? I mean, by what measure is rail more expensive? In comparison to rail road travel is massively subsidised. If we break down cost it would be interesting to see how they actually stack up against each other.

> I mean, by what measure is rail more expensive?

Your average truck puts out 8 metric tons per axle [1], railroads have to deal with 20-25 tons per axle [2] (and records of 40 tons/axle in Australia [3]). That is an awful lot more force that needs to be distributed into the ground, particularly as trucks usually reach only 80 km/h whereas freight trains run at 120 km/h in Europe [4].

Additionally, road vehicles have way more tolerance for shoddy road conditions - small bumps and potholes won't bother them too much, even at higher speeds, whereas rail vehicles are really, really prone to (deadly) derailments when the track goes bad for whatever reasons.

All of that makes constructing rail way more complex and as a result expensive.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road#Maintenance

[2] https://www.forschungsinformationssystem.de/servlet/is/32505...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axle_load

[4] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCterzug#Geschwindigkeite...

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#225

Post by bbzealot »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #223
airstrike wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corollary to this argument is that most environmental issues routinely blamed on individual behavior pale in comparison to the externalities from industry and commerce People talk shutting off the faucet while brushing one's teeth but ~70% of global freshwater usage comes from agriculture and ~20% from industry, with municipalities accounting for only 10%

It’s a convenient distraction for people in industries that depend on externalized costs, and it indulges those prone to self-righteousness and judgment (e.g., people who moralize their transportation and diet). Heavy industry and pseudo-environmentalists are unusual bedfellows. I distinctly remember when Teslas became popular, the reaction from environmental types was often frustration because apparently environment…

> I distinctly remember when Teslas became popular, the reaction from environmental types was often frustration because apparently environmentalism is supposed to be about sacrifice and yet Tesla is allowing the unwashed masses to help save the planet.

Honesty this is hard to believe, do you have any source/example to back it up?

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#226

Post by paulcole »

throwaway0x7E6 wrote: post #171
paulcole wrote: post #101

So today the wheel of who-do-we-blame-for-fucking-the-earth settles on commercial fishermen. The reality is that the actual wheel points at me and you and everyone we know (and everyone we don’t). If you’re reading this, the lifestyle you’re living is very likely incompatible with a planet that isn’t ravaged by climate change. You’ve got to make drastic changes to how you choose to live and do everything you can to g…

which reality do you live in? the one where everyone lives in a mcmansion, drives a F150 and making an international flight on their private jet every other day? 60% of the population in the US is one paycheck away from being homeless. what the fuck do you propose they do, stop eating? begin with yourself. send the plastic toy you've typed this on to recycling and don't buy another one.

Yeah, I’m aware that I’m the problem.

Here’s what I’m willing to do: not eat meat, not drive a car, not fly in planes, not live in single family housing, not use air conditioning for my apartment, and not have kids.

Is that enough? No. But it’s all I’m willing to do.

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#227

Post by throwaway894345 »

gruez wrote: post #109
airstrike wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corollary to this argument is that most environmental issues routinely blamed on individual behavior pale in comparison to the externalities from industry and commerce People talk shutting off the faucet while brushing one's teeth but ~70% of global freshwater usage comes from agriculture and ~20% from industry, with municipalities accounting for only 10%

> The corollary to this argument is that most environmental issues routinely blamed on individual behavior pale in comparison to the externalities from industry and commerce I agree with internalizing externalities, but let's not pretend that isn't part of individual behavior (consumer demand drives industry), or that individuals don't benefit from them in some way.

Why fight against the current? We aren’t going to convince billions of people, most of whom are struggling for survival, to make dramatic sacrifices. Moreover, in the overwhelming majority of cases consumers can’t tell which item is more environmentally friendly (the state of the art is “does the packaging have a faux burlap aesthetic?” which lends itself to pervasive greenwashing).

We simply cannot solve the problem by asking consumers to care more about the planet than feeding their kids, particularly when “caring about the planet” in this way is basically guesswork.

Climate change and other environmental problems are systemic, and thus we need systemic solutions—in the case of climate change, the ideal and gold standard is carbon pricing (with border adjustments).

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#228

Post by suoduandao2 »

npteljes wrote: post #193
gruez wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The corollary to this argument is that most environmental issues routinely blamed on individual behavior pale in comparison to the externalities from industry and commerce I agree with internalizing externalities, but let's not pretend that isn't part of individual behavior (consumer demand drives industry), or that individuals don't benefit from them in some way.

And individual behavior is just the result of the culture and the systems that surround us. We can campaign for individual change all day long, and they'll have less effect than what legislation could bring. In fact I don't think individuals have much choice. They can inconvenience, or hinder themselves, in what effectively amount to a race amongst each other, or they can participate as fully as they can, thereby als…

Politics is downstream from culture though. Mr Money Mustache and those like him are doing a huge amount for politics as well, just by making nonconsumerism sexy on an individual scale.

There's always this chicken-and-egg problem where legislation is talked about as though it could make us want different things, when in fact, the electorate wanting what it wants now, such legislation would be a losing horse for any politician. Making the moral choice seem attractive to one's neighbours is what I'd call true aikido.

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#229

Post by Tade0 »

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #197
Smithalicious wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who lives in the Netherlands it's certainly true that our country is well-optimized for bicycles, and I personally do everything either by bicycle or by public transport as I do not even have a driving license, but it's also true that the Netherlands is easy mode for building the necessary infrastructure - extremely flat, densely populated, and wealthy. This isn't meant to disagree with you or the people w…

It isn't well-optimized. It's certainly more optimized, but anything outside a major city is optimized for cars first and foremost. Anything below the size of Eindhoven included. The stats reflect this (car usage is still going up / barely going down, car size increasing) and it is easily explained given how far people are expected to live away from work without paying a small fortune in rent. On top of that, infrast…

> and it is easily explained given how far people are expected to live away from work without paying a small fortune in rent.

My country (Poland) has been de-urbanizing since the turn of the century for this exact reason.

People can't afford housing in city centres, so they buy properties in the suburbs and opt to drive everywhere instead.

The first generation that did this is currently nearing retirement and they'll soon have to decide on how to proceed. Fuel is expensive, driving skills wane with age and in an aging society finding a buyer for a house that appreciated in value but has scheduled maintenance of key components is going to be difficult.

Re: Fishing gear accounts for an alarming amount of plastic in oceans (2021)

#230

Post by formvoltron »

mschuster91 wrote: post #224
cycomanic wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The rail idea is good. > It's too bad rail is so expensive to make compared to roads. Is that actually true? I mean, by what measure is rail more expensive? In comparison to rail road travel is massively subsidised. If we break down cost it would be interesting to see how they actually stack up against each other.

> I mean, by what measure is rail more expensive? Your average truck puts out 8 metric tons per axle [1], railroads have to deal with 20-25 tons per axle [2] (and records of 40 tons/axle in Australia [3]). That is an awful lot more force that needs to be distributed into the ground, particularly as trucks usually reach only 80 km/h whereas freight trains run at 120 km/h in Europe [4]. Additionally, road vehicles have…

Do trains really need to be so heavy? I was imaging things the size of cars or smaller on rails, moving around everywhere cars currently move around.
Post reply on HN