Slashdot Mirror


Pacific Trash Vortex To Become Habitable Island?

thefickler writes "The Pacific Ocean trash dump is twice the size of Texas, or the size of Spain combined with France. The Pacific Vortex, as it is sometimes called, is made up of four million tons of plastic. Now, there's a proposal to turn this dump into 'Recycled Island.' The Netherlands Architecture Fund has provided the grant money for the project, and the WHIM architecture firm is conducting the research and design of Recycled Island. One of the three major aims of the project is to clean up the floating trash by recycling it on site. Two, the project would create new land for sustainable habitation complete with its own food sources and energy sources. Lastly, Recycled Island is to be a seaworthy island. While at the moment the project is still more or less a pipe dream, it's great that someone is trying to work out what to do with one of humanity's most bizarre environmental slip-ups."

75 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. Plastic People of Recyclistan by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Funny

    We already have that. It's call Los Angeles.

    1. Re:Plastic People of Recyclistan by captainpanic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Los Angeles is not so well known for its great recycling scheme... can you tell me more about it?

      To be honest, to a naive European, America as a whole is known as the most wasteful society in the world - but perhaps we're wrong?

    2. Re:Plastic People of Recyclistan by Entropius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Grandparent is alluding, I think, to the rate of plastic surgery in Los Angeles.

      LA is probably the most wasteful city in our wasteful nation.

    3. Re:Plastic People of Recyclistan by hedwards · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a whole yes, but there's a great deal of variety. Here in Seattle we're the only major city in the nation to actually be in compliance to the Kyoto protocol and we've made great strides at reducing the water consumption. We use less water now than we did 20 years ago, even though the population has gone up significantly since then. We also lead the nation in gas mileage.

    4. Re:Plastic People of Recyclistan by geekoid · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, it's not even close.

      Dallas, Cleveland, Atlanta, Tampa, and Indianapolis are the top 5, in that order.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Plastic People of Recyclistan by BigSes · · Score: 4, Funny

      What does Cleveland waste? Hopes and dreams?

    6. Re:Plastic People of Recyclistan by Bemopolis · · Score: 4, Funny

      Seven years of LeBron James.

      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
  2. Tiny bits... by Microlith · · Score: 5, Informative

    The greatest problem with the gyre is that the plastic in question is untold quadrillions of tiny, sometimes microscopic, bits of plastic that have broken down under UV light and descended somewhere in the water column. You would need to filter several meters deep to filter all the garbage out.

    Of course, bean counters will kill this because it's unprofitable, and everyone else will ignore it because it's so far out to sea.

    1. Re:Tiny bits... by Psaakyrn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Singapore, as a tiny island in the middle of (not-quite) nowhere, was also initially unprofitable. Look where it is now.

    2. Re:Tiny bits... by deniable · · Score: 4, Funny

      Look where it is now.

      Did it move? :)

    3. Re:Tiny bits... by fractoid · · Score: 4, Informative
      (a) Yes it is. Or rather, it occupies one: The North Pacific Gyre.
      (b) Yes they are. According to the first link in TFA:

      The tiny pieces of plastic are “the size of a grain of rice”, small enough to be eaten by fish. Chemicals, like “PCBs, DDT, and other toxins” that don’t dissolve in water are soaked up by the plastic. Those toxic chemicals get ingested by the fish eating the tiny pieces of plastic. Those fish are eaten by bigger fish that absorb the chemicals from the smaller fish. Ultimately, the contaminated fish may wind up on your dinner tables. We already know how dangerous these chemicals can be when ingested.

      (c) If the plastic is indeed spread throughout the top several meters, then yes, there is.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    4. Re:Tiny bits... by rts008 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah...they hired Reckless Kelly to tow them to a more favorable position. :-)

      *See end of movie. See ONLY the end or you will regret the experience, and truly hate me; if you have already seen the movie, you have my deepest sympathy*

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    5. Re:Tiny bits... by deniable · · Score: 2

      It should have been a comedy, but it was a Serious film. Young Einstein was much better.

    6. Re:Tiny bits... by NevarMore · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Right on! Since we can't filter all the garbage out it isn't worth picking up ANY of the garbage at all.

  3. Hyperbole by Beardydog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first story I read about the patch made it sound like it was bordering on becoming an island on its own... an area the size of texas made of milk bottles and grocery bags, all rustling against each other in the waves. No other article I've seen has been that bad, but all of them making it sound much worse than it actually is.

    I'm certainly not going to defend a vast region of polluted ocean and poisonous chemicals, but here's what Wikipedia has to say:
    "the patch is not visible from satellite photography since it primarily consists of suspended particulates in the upper water column. Since plastics break down to ever smaller polymers, concentrations of submerged particles are not visible from space, nor do they appear as a continuous debris field. Instead, the patch is defined as an area in which the mass of plastic debris in the upper water column is significantly higher than average."

    Moore's claim of having discovered a large, visible debris field is, however, a mischaracterization of the polluted region overall, since it primarily consists of particles that are generally invisible to the naked eye."
    "A similar patch of floating plastic debris is found in the Atlantic Ocean."

    It really doesnt sound terribly island-able. I'm sure you can scoop up enough solid material to build something, but you may have to drag a net for a couple of thousand zig-zagging miles to do it.

    1. Re:Hyperbole by chammy · · Score: 5, Informative

      The reality of it is a lot worse than most people imagine. Instead of easily manageable, solid chunks of plastic it's in the form of tons of tiny particles. This makes cleanup extremely difficult as well as makes the plastic much more lethal to wildlife. Animals try to eat the colorful bits, mistaking them for natural food sources: http://coastalcare.org/wp-content/images/issues/pollution/plastic/bird-carcass.jpg

    2. Re:Hyperbole by Beardydog · · Score: 5, Informative

      If the particles were chemically neutral, and harmless to see life it wouldn't be a problem at all, but I gather that the creatures in the area are greatly affected. The problem I have with most "Garbage Patch" reporting is more that they feel the need to "sex it up". The serious people of the world are capable of have care for and concern over environmental disasters that are invisible to the naked eye, but stories about the patch always seem directed at the same people who keep trying to pass 5-cent plastic bag taxes. It's become a mythical beast, a chimera whose dread legend is spread in whispers by folks who would probably be comfortable banning cars, but want no part of pebble-bed reactors.

      I think (and I'm trying to clarify my own thoughts here, as well, instead of ranting ad-hominem, as I have been) that a lot of people see the mind's-eye seascape of bags and bottles of consumer and commercial excess, and the horrors of a throwaway culture.

      The reality, as always, is more nuanced. Plastic bags and styrofoam cups a) go a long way toward reducing many other types of waste in our society, and b) will never go away, because they're so damn useful. Instead of railing against the very human behaviors that have created the problem or the very useful products that improved our lives tremendously for the last 60 years, we should probably focus on creating materials that break down more safely after they wind up in the ocean, or focus on our garbage gathering techniques, or hell, a couple thousand extremely expensive machines that sit in the Pacific and try to clean as much water as possible. Even that scenario is more likely than the societal changes that would be required to alleviate the patch.

      End of Lunatic Ravings

    3. Re:Hyperbole by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 4, Informative

      Twice the size of Texas = 537,202 square miles

      4,000,000 Tons plastic = 8,000,000,000 pounds

      14,892 lbs/square mile - 23.29 lbs per acre. [2.61 grams/meter square]

      Of course that is only surface area... how deep is it?

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    4. Re:Hyperbole by mythar · · Score: 3, Informative

      the killing birds part is pretty ugly, too.

    5. Re:Hyperbole by Beardydog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wait, I've got a smidge more raving to do...

      This story also reminds me of the women who recently spent three days walking around in pink shirts to raise awareness of breast cancer. They blocked traffic extremely frequently, often appointing themselves crossing guards in areas that already had lights, giving each other permission to walk in front of cars while people tried to get to and from work.

      I certainly sympathize with them. I know a lot of them have lost friends and family, and they want to do something for the cause... but honestly, we're all aware of breast cancer. All of that pink shirt money, time-off-of-work money, organizational money, etc could have gone toward research. Or it could have just not gotten in my way for three days, and I think we would have all been better off. If one person had been carrying a donation bucket for research, I would have felt a hundred times better about it.

      So they're building an island and making a symbolic effort at cleaning? Fantastic, I never drive through the Pacific ocean on the way to work. But they aren't making a dent in the problem, everyone with a pulse already knows about pollution, and they're misrepresenting the one problem they're even engaging in.

      Actually solving actual problems usually takes a lot of money, a lot of cooperation, and and a lot of work. It isn't showy, and chicks won't think you're hot for doing it. Not everybody involved in it gets to be a manager, or collect a paycheck from their non-profit employer, or be interviewed by the local news while they hold a sign that gives heart disease a severe textual talking-to.

      And I know a lot of people are doing that kind of work somewhere, but the campaigns that make the news are always awareness, or people who want to -feel- like they're fighting the good fight.

    6. Re:Hyperbole by fractoid · · Score: 4, Informative
      According to wikipedia:

      A study of marine debris near the center of the gyre as part of the Southern California Water Research Project found 334,271 pieces of plastic per square kilometer with a weight of 5.1 kilograms per square kilometer.[3]. If this 11.2 lb/km found near the center were the same throughout its estimated 20 million square kilometers expanse, the gyre would contain 225 million pounds or 113,000 tons of plastic waste. This is less than some estimates of from three to 100 million tons of plastic in the gyre.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    7. Re:Hyperbole by deathplaybanjo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "... you may have to drag a net for a couple of thousand zig-zagging miles to do it.

      Gulf fisherman could be paid to do that instead of not fishing

    8. Re:Hyperbole by apoc.famine · · Score: 2, Informative

      It isn't for big things like people. For little things that eat invertebrates the same size, it is a crisis. The plastic pieces are "feeding" the bottom of the food chain. Except that they don't have any nutritional value, and poison or choke up the stuff eating them. From a strictly concentration point of view, it's not overly scary. From a biological point of view, it is.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    9. Re:Hyperbole by operagost · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or the President could stop interfering with BP and Louisiana so that the leak could be stopped and cleanup accelerated.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    10. Re:Hyperbole by operagost · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If we need garbage bags, then why don't we just use old shopping bags?

      You mean people don't line their wastebaskets with shopping bags? You guys must be made of money. I only buy trash bags for the kitchen or big jobs. Unrecyclable stuff goes in old shopping bags-- reuse! We built up a surplus of these bags recently, so we recycled them. We try to use durable bags for small purchases, but it's simply impractical for grocery shopping. Also, I'm sure that one of these days some rent-a-cop is going to harass me in a store for walking around with my (empty) shopping bags.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  4. I hope they know about thinkgeek... by jddj · · Score: 3, Funny

    If they could slice it up like one of those "all edge pieces" brownie pans, everyone would get beachfront property!!

  5. The answer to our waste problems... by Nikola+Tesla+and+You · · Score: 2, Funny

    (1) Build a ****-load of WALL-E robots.
    (2) Use them to fill the ocean with trash.
    (3) Sell the land.
    (4) ???
    (5) Profit!

  6. Slip up? by tokyoahead · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What an euphemism!

    This is not something that just happened one day because someone made a mistake. It's the result of decades of carelessness and ignorance.
    We can be only happy that the stuff accumulates all in one place so we have at least the hint of a chance to fix it.

    Try to do that with the space debris!

    --
    no sig
  7. Where are the Pictures of Garbage Island? by Neptunes_Trident · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have heard of this huge mass in the Pacific Ocean for quite some time now. But I never seem to be able to find actual pictures or satellite images of this "Double the size of Texas" island. The only images I ever see are ones that show land mass on the horizon. Which means images that are NOT in the middle of the pacific Ocean. Won't someone help a skeptic out?

    1. Re:Where are the Pictures of Garbage Island? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not visible, even when you're in the middle of it. It's tiny (mostly microscopic) pieces of plastic in the top several metres in higher concentrations than elsewhere. You need special instruments to detect it.

    2. Re:Where are the Pictures of Garbage Island? by OctaviusIII · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm unsure if "skeptic" is the right term, but a quick jaunt to Wikipedia ought to help. To summarize: it's a large area of the ocean where the concentration of plastic particles is significantly higher than normal. Most of the particles are too small to see and are essentially dissolved into the ocean. There are some bits of visible garbage floating along, but the patch still looks and acts very much like normal ocean.

      --
      What's this? Another weblog? On transit?
    3. Re:Where are the Pictures of Garbage Island? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It doesn't exist in the form that is being presented in articles such as this. The numbers given by North Atlantic Garbage Patch page on wikipedia are "200,000 pieces of debris per square kilometre". This translates into one piece every 5 square meters. Keep in mind that in general these are broken down pieces (cm^2 scale or smaller). So, you won't find any pictures, because it probably isn't possible to take one that looks like anything. That having been said, the increased concentration of plastics is probably something that is worth being concerned about (scientifically, not in this hysterical fashion).

    4. Re:Where are the Pictures of Garbage Island? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd really like to see a decent pic too.

      Find a picture of the middle of the ocean. That's what it looks like.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  8. We need more plastic! by kainosnous · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This all sounds like a great idea, but from what I've gathered, the mass isn't really solid enough to make anything out of it. The logical conclusion is that we need more plastic.

    As a general rule, I have tended to throw my plastic into landfills. I figure that, if time lasts long enough, someday they may provide us with (potentially kid-friendly and bouncy) mountains. However, seeing that science has granted us this new frontier, I suppose that I should be throwing my plastic out to sea.

    --
    There are 10 commandments: 01)Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God 10)Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Matt22:34-40
  9. Let's Go Global! by Itninja · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...twice the size of Texas, or the size of Spain combined with France...

    Or how about 1/7th the size of Brazil! Or maybe the size of 5 Ecuadors! Or the size of 1 1/10 Chads! This is fun! Who's got one?

    --
    I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    1. Re:Let's Go Global! by H0D_G · · Score: 2, Funny

      But how many libraries of congress is that?

      --
      Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home!
    2. Re:Let's Go Global! by delinear · · Score: 2, Funny

      I just assumed the European countries were used as a metric equivalent to the US measurement...

  10. Stupid idea by RT+Alec · · Score: 2, Funny

    Stupid... but cool as hell. There is such a fine line between stupid and clever.

  11. Didn't somebody take a boat out there... by Soloact · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... to where this supposed "dump" was located, and only found small pieces of broken-down plastics, and no massive dump like the article indicates? Seems there was a documentary done about this "dump" being an exaggeration, and over-hyped in the news.

    1. Re:Didn't somebody take a boat out there... by delinear · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well the article (and other articles on the subject) are all very counter productive. They all suggest massive mounds of floating trash because it's easier for human minds to picture those as evil. This downplays the fact that the real danger are the chemical-laden particles of plastic being eaten by wildlife and entering the food chain. In other words, in trying to build people up into some kind of frothing state of hysteria, the people behind these articles are detracting from the issue and giving sceptics an easy out at the same time.

  12. Tiny Bits of Plastic entering the Food Chain by deboli · · Score: 5, Informative

    Most of the flotsam there consists of small particles that are distributed in the first 10m of the water column. What would need to be done is to filter it out and bind it similar to how pebbles are bound with cement to create concrete to create large enough bits that can be combined into an island.

    Eventually we (the world community) will have to clear this patch as the plastics now enter the food chain and threaten to poison us all. Already there are areas in the ocean where plastic is more prevalent than krill and plastic is being ingested by marine animals, accumulating in higher organisms and ultimately in us too.

    Collecting plastic there would be a nice occupation for all those fishermen that have been made redundant due to overfishing and the necessities to conserve fish stocks. Get them to fish plastic instead and pay them for the trash catch they return.

    Two articles on that matter, a bit lengthy but worth your time:
    http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/270
    http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Ocean/Moore-Trashed-PacificNov03.htm

  13. Re:Not as dense os lead to believe by deniable · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's why the linked articles didn't have any photos. It sounds like a boring photo op.

  14. Re:Sink it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

  15. Scale by C10H14N2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Down to more tangible scale, it is roughly 3 grams per square meter. A typical cube of sugar is roughly 4 grams. Now consider that's just surface area, not volume. You're not going to be able to see much of it even if you're swimming in it.

  16. Basic Math Failure?? by Somegeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They are saying that there are 4 million tons of plastic out there, and they want to build a 10,000 square km island.

    Assume a basic building unit of a plastic floating barrel and a square plastic platform to sit on top of it. Assume that 40kg of plastic are used in the barrel/platform and it will provide all of the necessary flotation for a square meter chunk of island.

    In the above scenario, 4 million tons of plastic gets you one hundred million barrel/platform units, and therefore a surface area of one hundred million square meters. That means an island that is TEN square km. Not really enough land to make self sufficient home complete with farmland for half a million people.

    What are they going to build the other 9,990 square km of floating island out of?

    --
    And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
  17. Re:Something is missing here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hundreds of years ago it seemed like lunacy to dry out land with big fans, but the Dutch figured out a way to do this. Only a pessimist can say in this preliminary stage that they'll definitely fail in this scheme.

    And if pessimists were the drivers of technology, we'd still be living in caves and calling science magic.

  18. That is the whole by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course that is only surface area... how deep is it?

    That's the thing. There is no surface area, it's all particles submerged.

    You just calculated the whole of it (by weight).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  19. Re:Not as dense os lead to believe by arivanov · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not quite so.

    It does not look sufficiently impressive on film. A degraded bottle every few tens if not hundred meters does not make a good photo op. There is also a lot of dispersed plastic in the water itself. However, it is not something which you can picture, post and shout: "See how we ravished the Earth". Definitely nothing that can make the same kind of statement like a picture of a pelican dipped in BP produce.

    --
    Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
    http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  20. Re:Sink it. by ChrisK87 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The key phrase there is "equal effort".

    The plastic and other debris will get gathered either way. The difference is that one way you either melt into blocks and sink it or ship it to a landfill, and the other way you go through the massive money and energy expenditure to convert it into building materials and assemble it on site into a floating recycled modern utopia.

    As well intentioned as this proposal is, we will never, ever get to the point where the cheapest source of building materials is a container vessel full of assorted sea flotsam. There will always be renewable lumber, glass from or inexhaustible supply of silicates, and presumably soon plant-derived plastics that will be competitive with oil-derived ones. If we decide it's worth the investment to clean this thing up, the garbage will go to a landfill where it will either be recycled or not. But under no circumstances will the economical to build it into a floating disneyland on site. A floating garbage-packaging plant maybe, but why return the recycled plastic to make a city? Use cheaper materials instead. Or better yet, stick your new city on land within reach of a desalination plant, and not stick yourself with the engineering constraint of making everything float.

    I'm all for fixing the environment, but this specific proposal is economic nonsense. I'm sure it'd be cool to live in a shiny eco-neutral star trek paradise, but wishing will not make this actually work.

  21. Re:Something is missing here by Vectormatic · · Score: 5, Informative

    Small correction, we dried it out with pumps, powered by windmills

    But yeah, half the country is below sea-level, if you have any sort of land/see issue, we are the guys to see.

    --
    People, what a bunch of bastards
  22. Re:Something is missing here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Pirate bay was looking to form a nation not long ago. I think they'd be interested in maintaining a plastic "country", whether or not the real scientists are interested in sticking around. And frankly, at the rate we're contributing to the vortex, they will probably grow over time.

  23. It's actually worse by LKM · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't really understand your reasoning. The patch wouldn't be as bad if it were actual plastic things that one could somehow remove. The fact that the plastic has broken down into small particles is worse than what most people seem to imagine; the way it is now, it can enter into the food chain, and there is no reasonable way to remove it. Your logic seems to be "Wikipedia says it's invisible, so it can't be too bad." How does it being invisible make it any better?

    So the stories don't make it sound worse than it is; they make it sound better than it actually is!

    1. Re:It's actually worse by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I tend to agree. Sometimes the shit you can see just distracts your attention from worse shit that you can't... //to do: insert joke about politics here

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  24. Re:Sink it. by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    And how do you propose making a concentration of individual pieces of plastics, chemicals, and other misc objects all heavier than water?

    Glue rocks to them.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  25. The Numbers by mosb1000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Pacific Vortex as it is sometimes called, is made up of four million tons of Plastic.

    Recycled Island would be 10,000 Km2

    4,000,000,000 kg / 10,000,000,000 m^2 = 0.4 kg/m^2

    Anyone else have a problem with this?

  26. Re:Something is missing here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have a see issue, but my optometrist isn't Dutch.

  27. Re:Sink it. by fractoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the implication is that once you've gathered the stuff and made a big block of molten plastic, it's trivial and very cheap to turn it into a flotation tank. It's the initial manufacturing step that's the hard bit, and if (big 'if', I agree) you can make it in the first place, you might as well make it into real estate instead of boat anchors.

    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  28. Re:Something is missing here by Dr.+Hok · · Score: 2, Funny

    Small correction, we dried it out with pumps, powered by windmills

    I I were an absolute pedant 'd point out that windmills grind corn, so the pumps were powered by wind turbines. In Norfolk they actually called them "wind pumps"

    If I were an absolute pedant I'd point out that windmills used to grind corn. Nowadays they just stand around and creak and smell of old wood.

    --
    Say out loud: I'm an Aspie and I'm somewhat proud, I guess. Uh. Can I write an email in all caps instead? Hm...
  29. Re:Something is missing here by delinear · · Score: 3, Informative

    It seems the problem with a lot of this particular type of plastic is that it's made to degrade quickly and it's literally disintegrating in the ocean, so a similar project (without heavy re-processing of the plastic) is not feasible. Still, with four million tons of it up for grabs I'm surprised people are dragging their feet over collecting it.

  30. Re:Something is missing here by Dr.+Hok · · Score: 2, Informative

    Where does it say the island itself is made of plastic?

    From the article: "The island would be built where the trash is located and would convert the waste onsite".

    Read on:

    Cleaning it up is going to cost a lot of money and require a great deal of either scooping up the plastic and shipping it back to shore, or some sort of onsite recycling for building something like Recycled Island.

    --
    Say out loud: I'm an Aspie and I'm somewhat proud, I guess. Uh. Can I write an email in all caps instead? Hm...
  31. Re:Something is missing here by Kratisto · · Score: 3, Funny

    Windmills do not work that way! Good night!

    --
    Conscience is the inner voice which warns us that someone may be looking.
  32. Re:Something is missing here by GuidoJ · · Score: 2, Informative

    They're going to recycle the plastic into the island: http://www.recycledisland.com/materialization.html. BTW it has been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_Island

  33. Re: Valuable Waste by delinear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I guess the issues are removing tiny particles of widely distributed plastic from an area of the ocean twice the size of Texas while at the same time not removing everything living from said ocean. Apparently most of the particles are no bigger than a grain of rice, so any system to sieve them out of the ocean would likely scoop up anything larger than plankton. I've not heard any specifics about how they plan to perform the separation.

  34. Sounds like a page out of Snowcrash by inkhorn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just like the floating junk armada in Neal Stephensons Snowcrash novel isn't it?
    Absolute best fiction book I've ever read.

  35. Re:Missing the point by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nonsense.

    Everyone knows that any and all initiatives to preserve the one and only planet we have at our disposal are part of a massive liberal conspiracy to swindle hard-working hard-spending 'merkins out of their money. Right?

    --

    People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
  36. Re:Sink it. by Pieroxy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let me know when you figure out a method to glue 1 trillion individual molecules to pieces of rocks.

    Buy lots of glue.

  37. Re:Sink it. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 4, Funny

    Obviously, with 1 trillion little metal-foil tubes of superglue. Don't be daft.

  38. Re:Something is missing here by BasilBrush · · Score: 3, Informative

    If I were an absolute pedant I'd point out that turbines are supposed to have enclosed blades.

    I'm no pedant, but there's nothing in the definition of a turbine that says they have to be in enclosures.
    http://www.google.co.uk/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=define:+turbine&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=&ei=rvI-TOmQNIjw0wSH-oyYBw
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine

    Sure enough the wind powered generators in the countryside are indeed powered by turbines; the turney bladey things you see are turbines.

  39. Re:Not as dense os lead to believe by BLKMGK · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've watched several specials about the Gyre including the one you linked - NONE of them show anything like the picture you linked which I suspect was taken elsewhere and not in open water. It's not good and probably pretty bad but sadly it's not picture fantastic else you better believe the CNNs of the world would be going nutz to photo it much as they have the birds BP has harmed...

    --
    Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
  40. Re:Something is missing here by stdarg · · Score: 2, Funny

    This sounds like the greatest delivery system for recycling ever conceived. I can dump my trash into a river and it will eventually end up being recycled on an island in the middle of the Pacific. All transportation taken care of by Mother Nature.

  41. Re:Something is missing here by YttriumOxide · · Score: 2, Informative

    Good thing we've got biodegrading plastic!

    All plastic is biodegradable, being organic... the main problem with it is that the majority of it takes a VERY long time to do so. Another problem is that the stuff that does degrade somewhat more quickly tends to degrade in to some not so nice things to have floating around. (actually to be more strictly accurate, it's usually the additives to the plastic being released during degradation that are bad)

    --
    My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
    Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
  42. Re: Valuable Waste by natehoy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let's not forget that this is way the hell out in the ocean, many miles from land. You can't just send out skimmers like we can for the oil spill, because (a) something that small really has no business being that far out and (b) there's no way you can have enough fuel on board to get there and back, so you'd need a lot of logistics work.

    It's not impossible, just impractical, and given that it's not on anyone's drive to work no one thinks about it. It's "way the fuck over there". The NIMBY crowd is happy because there are no backyards nearby. Cleaning it up is unprofitable and the amount of effort is way out of proportion with the accolades any group would ever hope to get from undertaking such a monumental effort.

    Imagine the reaction: "Wow! The ocean looks the same as it did before! I feel so good about that $10 billion we spent!"

    I'm not saying it's not worth doing, only that making people believe it's worth doing is goddamned hard. They don't see the chemicals entering their food chain, because CNN/Fox don't show it as a graphic on the 6 o'clock spews. We have other disasters closer to home that will keep people's attention and sell more ads for plastic shit (that then gets thrown into the ocean, of course).

    So an all-out effort and solving the problem ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

    However, who says we have to solve the problem in a year, or a decade? How about affordable, smaller-scale, longer-term, less dramatic attempts?

    Example: some form of solar-powered autonomous robotic skimmer that can skim the plastic and compress it into bricks, and/or use it as fuel directly? There'd be no real rush to the project, so you could build a relatively small number of them, drop them in the middle of the mess, and have them at least start to make a dent in it. Even if each robot could only clean up a few hundred square meters a day and make a few bricks, it's crap taken out of the water that used to be in the water. It's not dramatic, it's just a bunch of real-life Wall-E's out there getting shit cleaned up.

    They could operate slowly enough that any fish could swim out of the net with no problems, while plastic particles rather lack any kind of mobility last I checked. :)

    --
    "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
  43. Basic maintenance failure by SEWilco · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Assume a basic building unit of a plastic floating barrel and a square plastic platform to sit on top of it. Assume that 40kg of plastic are used in the barrel/platform and it will provide all of the necessary flotation for a square meter chunk of island.

    Remember that your barrel is built of plastic which breaks down in seawater and sunlight. You'll have to keep replacing barrels.

  44. Re:Where is it, exactly? by multimediavt · · Score: 2, Informative
  45. Not even close to economically feasible by patrissimo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is a terrible idea even though it gets suggested all the time. The cost of gathering plastic from the trash vortex in the ocean - a very expensive environment to operate in - is literally orders of magnitude higher than gathering plastic by buying and digging up a landfill. I haven't heard about anyone flipping landfills for a 10,000% return, which is what it would take to indicate that it's worth getting plastic out of the Vortex. You are going to spend at least $100, maybe as much as $1000, to get every $1 of plastic out. There are much funner ways to waste money - drugs and hookers, for example.