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.

 

Sinking the Oriskany

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 09:43 AM
link   
PCBsThe Oriskany will be sunk with about 700 pounds of PCBs

So the plan is to create an artificial reef for tourists to dive in. Aside from the PCBs... what about all that steel? An aircraft carrier can contain upwards of 60,000 tons of steel. Has the word "recycle" been lost? In an age where we are destroying our natural environment to strip mine precious metals and ore... why sink 60k tons of steel to the depths of the ocean? Couldn't that steel be reused to build bridges, tools, dunno... prybars or something? I suppose for the same reason that all of the world's gold is kept in banks. keep that market inflated. And then "they" have transported this ship back and forth between texas and tallahassee how many times, wasting fuel? ...and what about the other 20 ships the navy wants polluting the bottom of our oceans? is there no salvageable steel/aluminum/etc. aboard those either?



Sri Oracle




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Hi there,

as a diver, I have to say I agree with you here 100%! Whilst the creation of an artificial reef is in a way to be applauded as it will provide a new safe haven for marine life, I have serious doubts about the wisdom of not recycling the vast quantity of material that constitutes the Oriskany. It would be better NOT to destroy reefs in the first place and then artificial ones would not be needed! Again, as a diver, I would prefer EVERY time to dive a real reef rather than an artificial one.

Wrecks are a fact of life - since man first ventured onto the water in his fragile craft, some have foundered. How much better is it to dive on say, a 17th century galleon that came to grief naturally, and as such is a part of history, than a 20th century warship deliberately sunk, that is, somehow, artificial? Crazy I know as there are already zillions of wrecks down there already, but that's how I feel about it.

If as much energy was spent trying to reduce the amount of damage that we cause to the ocean bottom by bottom trawling, cyanide and dynamite fishing in Asia, shark finning and other despicable practices then the ocean and it's inhabitants would be better off.

It's about time we took our job as stewards of the earth a bit more seriously and helped improve the environment of this, our wonderful blue planet.

Sink the Oriskany - don't do it!

Good thread Sri Oracle



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   
A raggly looking man pushing a shopping cart full of scrap metal just went rattling past my downtown home.




posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Must be better than chucking it in the ocean, right?

One day the world will get tired of us screwing up and shake us off, like fleas on a dogs' back..........sure someone has said that before, but it's how I've always thought of it



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 06:09 AM
link   
Because sinking it serves many purposes. It allows them to test new explosives to see how well they work, and to figure out how to make our ships stand up to them. It makes an artificial reef, and gives divers something to look at when they dive. And 99% of the ship is aluminum, and it's very difficult and expensive to cut something like that into pieces that any recycling company could accept.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join