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 smaller scale. I don't think this is a situation where you should think small.
3. Thirdly, they say this will be in the way for boats, and wildlife. The site addresses most of the wildlife concerns because there's nothing to capture wildlife, and it's basically a floating wall. The wildlife can swim under it, or away from it. I'm sure some jellyfish would be floating into it, but it seems like a big improvement over nets. Also, it says their large scale operational test will be 10km wide. That's not exactly disrupting the shipping lanes in the middle of the ocean.
4. Their last points are awful. They say the plastic waste can't be recycled, so it's worthless to pick up, and they close with saying 'cleaning the oceans will never be a solution', and we should instead just reduce the use of plastic.
In short, I have no idea if this thing will work, but watching the videos, it seems like a decent solution that's worth exploring. They seem motivated, and a couple of million dollars isn't much to invest on such a project and team.
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.
I am not qualified to judge the merits of the criticism or the response, I'm just kind of happy someone is at least trying to do something about trash in the ocean.
I didn't see mentioned. Why do it? It might save some species? That needs to be something they're sure of and sure they can't be saved more cheaply other ways.
Throwaway0812|11 years ago
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 smaller scale. I don't think this is a situation where you should think small.
3. Thirdly, they say this will be in the way for boats, and wildlife. The site addresses most of the wildlife concerns because there's nothing to capture wildlife, and it's basically a floating wall. The wildlife can swim under it, or away from it. I'm sure some jellyfish would be floating into it, but it seems like a big improvement over nets. Also, it says their large scale operational test will be 10km wide. That's not exactly disrupting the shipping lanes in the middle of the ocean.
4. Their last points are awful. They say the plastic waste can't be recycled, so it's worthless to pick up, and they close with saying 'cleaning the oceans will never be a solution', and we should instead just reduce the use of plastic.
In short, I have no idea if this thing will work, but watching the videos, it seems like a decent solution that's worth exploring. They seem motivated, and a couple of million dollars isn't much to invest on such a project and team.
patrickaljord|11 years ago
leorocky|11 years ago
http://www.theoceancleanup.com/blog/show/item/responding-to-...
I am not qualified to judge the merits of the criticism or the response, I'm just kind of happy someone is at least trying to do something about trash in the ocean.
Yardlink|11 years ago
charlysisto|11 years ago
infruset|11 years ago
so what?
kayoone|11 years ago
dueprocess|11 years ago
I'd say they were in good company.
On a quasi-related note, here's a project I'm launching soon. It's for innovators: http://diepenniless.com
dueprocess|11 years ago