It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The surprising economics of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

page: 2
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
Are there people in Europe and the United States actively dumping plastic into the ocean? I want to know who these people are so they can be prosecuted.


Yes but not nearly as much as developing economies including China and India. China is by far the greatest polluter.




posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Not legitimate ?

The first link provided is NOAA !

And no, CO2 is not a problem - it is added in most greenhouses to speed plant growth.

That's not to say that we don't have real problems. We do.

But we should focus on those.


Fukushima is one such HUGE problem, but basically NOTHING is being done, and this is URGENT



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: YouSir




OR...maybe we could all get off our collective thumbs and actually spend a few dollars on a solution going forward...What do you think about that...................hmmm...?


Good idea ... so why don't the developed nations fix up the pacific ocean garbage dump ... and the answer is ... Money. It would cost too much!

So, let us turn out attention to someone else ... China and India will do today ... and blame them for our woes.

The real problem is that China and India know this truth. They hear all the rhetoric coming their way and then they ignore it. They ignore it because the Western world does not practice what they preach.

Hypocicy at its finest. So yes, we do need to clean up this world of ours. Let the developed nations start the ball rolling. After all, the vast majority of the Pacific dump was put there by the West.

P

edit on 2/3/2015 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 09:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: YouSir




OR...maybe we could all get off our collective thumbs and actually spend a few dollars on a solution going forward...What do you think about that...................hmmm...?


Good idea ... so why don't the developed nations fix up the pacific ocean garbage dump ... and the answer is ... Money. It would cost too much!

So, let us turn out attention to someone else ... China and India will do today ... and blame them for our woes.

The real problem is that China and India know this truth. They hear all the rhetoric coming their way and then they ignore it. They ignore it because the Western world does not practice what they preach.

Hypocicy at its finest. So yes, we do need to clean up this world of ours. Let the developed nations start the ball rolling. After all, the vast majority of the Pacific dump was put there by the West.

P


Correct! It is all about money. The desire for money will be mankind's downfall in the end.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: eXia7

Well that was disturbing to watch......so basically the plastic is breaking down in the ocean into a sort of plastic soup...as the guy mentions in the vids "we are inadvertently eating out own #"....there is no way of removing it in this condition and the plastic will make its way through the entire food chain......wow just wow...

Thx for posting that...although very disturbing it was very informative



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 12:21 AM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz

The link to NOAA is about the garbage patch, that you seem to DENY the existence of.

I do not understand how an intelligent person and aware person can claim that the sharp increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is not a concern to the human species.

Plant life on this planet is not growing any faster as a result of the increase of CO2, in fact most scientist agree there has been a great decrease in plant life on this planet while the CO2 levels has been rising. In other words, you are just writing what sounds good, something that an uninformed person may even believe, but the reality is your claim in pure BS!

edit on 3-3-2015 by jrod because: have a nice day



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 12:37 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

1. I don't deny anything
From the NOAA link (did you even read it ?):
"There is no "garbage patch," a name which conjures images of a floating landfill in the middle of the ocean, with miles of bobbing plastic bottles and rogue yogurt cups. Morishige explains this misnomer:
While it's true that these areas have a higher concentration of plastic than other parts of the ocean, much of the debris found in these areas are small bits of plastic (microplastics) that are suspended throughout the water column. A comparison I like to use is that the debris is more like flecks of pepper floating throughout a bowl of soup, rather than a skim of fat that accumulates (or sits) on the surface."

For the record, I am not arguing garbage or plastic is good -it's not
I am saying we need to focus on the more urgent problems first, like Fukushima.

2. CO2 is VITAL to plant life, check any biology textbook or scholarly article
ex: dl.sciencesocieties.org...

I would expect someone "intelligent" to cite science, not propaganda

Why do you think greenhouses add CO2 ?

edit on 3-3-2015 by M5xaz because: typo

edit on 3-3-2015 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: M5xaz
1.NOAA seems to be implying that while the plastic issue is important, there is no great garbage patch:


Do you read what you write? There is the denialism from you about the garbage patch.

We are way above elementary science here. You are over simplifying the issue and ignore all kinds of important observations and essentially twist words and facts to suit your argument. And you have the gall to accuse me of not using science in this argument.

If the extra CO2 will cause plants to grow faster, why have we not observed a 40% increase in plant growth in past half century to correlate with increase of CO2?




edit on 3-3-2015 by jrod because: yep



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358


Ummm...Actually...The United States comes in twentieth out of the top twenty offenders...

Take a guess at who's first................yep...ding, ding, ding...you guessed it...CHINA...


Stop breathing that Beijing air.......it's really not good for you...

You see...there are solutions...but solutions are only as effective as attention span and a willingness to...be...effective...

If the citizenry of all of the offending nations...(all nations that trade on the high seas and all nations that have coastlines...NOT just the west) gave enough of a damn to force awareness on their collective governments then something would be done about it...Barring that...it will probably take some foundational effort that lobbied the governments of the offending nations into contributions to clean it up and recycle the mess...as well as seeking contributions from individuals the world round...

SEE...

originally posted by: YouSir
a reply to: iDope

Ummm...that's a very good question...Over a year ago I E-mailed the UN agency for the environment (championsoftheearth@unep.org) and asked them whether there were any plans by member nations to clean up... this...mess...however...I have yet to hear any response back from them......glad I didn't hold my breath on that one...

I suppose that there's not a whole lot of real concern for issues such as this...even amongst agencies claiming to "champion"...such...

I even thought of creating a foundation to clean it up but was unsure how to proceed on that front...any suggestions...?




YouSir



You see...there are things that could be done...all it takes is a willingness to try...
As of this post I have bookmarked a number of sites that deal specifically with creating foundations...My intent is to walk the walk...I already know how to get the funding ball rolling...after that...it's endless charity meetings and lobbying ALL of the offending parties...
Who knows how far I get...I'll keep you posted...





YouSir
edit on 3-3-2015 by YouSir because: of a transpositional error



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

1.Did you read the reference I gave you ?
NOAA is the one pointing out that "There is no "garbage patch" , but rather an assemblage of micropartiles.
READ THE REFERENCE

2. Deforestation (not good) is the reason for the drop in plant coverage.

3. CO2 helps compensate as it does boost plant growth - quote science, NOT PROPAGANDA
Most crops show that for any given level of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), increasing the CO2 level to 1,000 ppm will increase the photosynthesis by about 50% over ambient CO2 levels.
www.omafra.gov.on.ca...

What we need to focus on are REAL and URGENT problems first, like fixing chemical dump sites and nuclear accident sites.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz

The pacific garbage patch is real and growing, and again you make a starwman argument against it by misrepresenting what NOAA published about it. Here are youtube clips that do a good job of explaining it. There is also a garbage patch in the North Atlantic too.







About the CO2, you are really oversimplifying the issue and trying to make it seem like I do not know what photosynthesis is and the role CO2 plays in plant life. The argument you are using is a logic fallacy, appealing to nature. You want us to believe that because plants 'breathe' CO2, that more CO2 is a good thing while ignoring all the other negative aspects of what excess CO2 in the atmosphere will do to this planet.


We need to focus on ALL man made problems.

The problem with environmentalism and clean-up of dump sites is economics. Cleaning up the world goes against capitalism. The argument will always be 'who is going to pay for that?' and ultimately becomes the argument that addressing environmental problems will cause tax increases and no one wants that.



edit on 4-3-2015 by jrod because: typo



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

1. I am not making any strawman arguments - I am DIRECTLY quoting NOAA. Where am I misrepresenting ?

2. CO2 impact on plant growth: Again, I am not misrepresenting anything. Scientific facts from reputable source only:
Ambient CO2 level in outside air is about 340 ppm by volume. All plants grow well at this level but as CO2 levels are raised by 1,000 ppm photosynthesis increases proportionately resulting in more sugars and carbohydrates available for plant growth
www.omafra.gov.on.ca...
Fact.
No misrepresentation of any kind

3. Everything can't be priority number 1, in any society. The Soviets were at least able to build a sarcophagus for Chernobyl within weeks/months of the disaster. This was accomplished THIRTY years ago.
Surely something similar can be done about Fukushima.

As bad as plastic is, continued dumping of radioactive material in the Pacific is far far worse....
edit on 4-3-2015 by M5xaz because: typo



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz

There is a forum dedicated to Fukushima on here. It almost seems like you are using Fukushima as a red herring in this topic.

Ask anyone who has sailed though the North Pacific Gyre, they will confirm the existence of the 'great garbage patch.'



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Fukushima a red herring?

The worst disaster since Chernobyl a red herring ?

Seriously ?



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: M5xaz
Wow, I do not even know how to respond. Fukushima is a problem, hence it gets it's own forum.

You are using Fukushima as a red herring in this thread, the topic is about the Pacific garbage patch. Now if you want to say there are radioactive hotspots in the Pacific garbage path as a result of Fukushima, then that would be consistent with this thread. Instead you use Fukushima as a diversion from the OP.

Also CO2 today is around 400ppm and rising, not sure where you got the 340ppm.

Perhaps you need to look up the definition of strawman argument. The NOAA link you provided does NOT deny the existence of the Garbage patch as you claim.
edit on 6-3-2015 by jrod because: add







 
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join