Official Off Topic Discussion Thread #1

[skjl47]

Our city has a recycle policy in place for such items and I do my small part of placing any recyclable item that I can in the blue bins;soda cans,paper,aluminum containers,water bottles and yes....even plastic shopping bags.

hello; Yes I do the same. I also have some quart water bottles I bought that I wash and reuse. I have some used that way for well over a decade. I have some newer ones as well. That way I do not but the plastic water bottles for a onetime use.
A big current problem is that China has stopped taking our plastic so I am not sure what will be happening. Also my local recycle places do not take the plastic shopping bags at all. I can take them to a Wal-Mart or to the local Kroger.

 

[jaws7777]

No taxation without (proper) representation

 

[J. H.]

There stil is money back for the cans and bottles, in some states, but not enough to make them worth gathering. I remember walking a mile a couple of times to get returns on big bags of cans and bottle only to be rewarded with a lousy $5.

 

[Warborg]

I remember when Austin imposed the no plastic bags at stores. I stopped shopping there and starting going to the ones in Pflugerville.

 

[Drstrangelove]

The irony of course is that:

1) The top 5 countries that put the plastic in the oceans doesn't include, wait for it, the US. Sixty percent comes from east asia. Therefore, regardless of what we do, the issue isn't going away.

https://qz.com/595673/more-than-half-the-plastic-in-the-ocean-comes-from-these-five-countries/

2) Virtually all of the plastic has degraded to a size so small that it can't and shouldn't be physically removed. So those pictures of bags and bottles represents almost none of the actual plastic in the ocean. But it sells well to "greenies" to see a floating bottle or bag.

https://www.sea.edu/plastics/frequently_asked_questions

3) That no one can actually demonstrate how this will ecologically affect the oceans or it's biological processes. Yes, it will be there a long time, but it's speculative if that will actually harm the ocean.


But oh well. This is really what happens when people determined to save the environment descend to the least common denominator and ban, ban, ban. Let's hope they don't pass laws banning lungs because they produce carbon dioxide.

 

[krichardson]

There stil is money back for the cans and bottles, in some states, but not enough to make them worth gathering. I remember walking a mile a couple of times to get returns on big bags of cans and bottle only to be rewarded with a lousy $5.

Yeah,I see people around here making their rounds foraging and collecting soda and beer cans to turn in for money.I did a project back before I stopped drinking soda.I managed to save up enough cans to fill up two full Hefty trash bags over a period of time and I hauled them to the recycler.I was lucky if I came away with thirty dollars.

But oh well. This is really what happens when people determined to save the environment descend to the least common denominator and ban, ban, ban. Let's hope they don't pass laws banning lungs because they produce carbon dioxide.

I wouldn't put that past the powers that be in New Jersey as their next move.

 

[jaws7777]

I heard there was a floating island of this stuff larger than texas

 

[skjl47]

That no one can actually demonstrate how this will ecologically affect the oceans or it's biological processes. Yes, it will be there a long time, but it's speculative if that will actually harm the ocean.

Hello; Interesting comment. I guess you are limiting the scope to only the microplastics and not to the clear damage larger bits of plastic are known to have done. I have seen many photos of animals, including those in the ocean, with those plastic circles from soda can six packs stuck on their bodies.
If I recall correctly I think it is sea turtles who have been found with plastic bags in their stomachs. A theory being the turtles mistake the bags for jelly fish they feed on. I think many animals have been found with plastic in their guts and these plastics do not digest so are thought to interfere with normal digestion. Over a decade ago cows in India were found to have plastic bags in their gut.

Back to the microplastics in the ocean. Sure it is speculation at the early stages to assume the micro plastics in the ocean are all negative. just as it is equally speculative to assume the microplastics are having no impact or even a positive impact. My sense of it is there is a much more likely hood for negative outcomes than for neutral or positive outcomes when a new material is introduced in such a pervasive manner. I do not figure to add microplastics to my aquarium fish food any time soon.

 

[Drstrangelove]

Hello; Interesting comment. I guess you are limiting the scope to only the microplastics and not to the clear damage larger bits of plastic are known to have done. I have seen many photos of animals, including those in the ocean, with those plastic circles from soda can six packs stuck on their bodies.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/55488/7-strange-things-swallowed-whales
http://www.worldfishingnetwork.com/stories/post/strangest-things-ever-found-inside-fish
https://www.bustle.com/articles/35742-16-weirdest-things-ever-found-inside-a-sharks-stomach

I wasn't limiting my scope. I'm not claiming that some animals out of the hundreds of thousands, or millions or tens of millions of any particular species hasn't been harmed. I'm suggesting that there is no evidence that the ocean ecosystem has been harmed.

I had two main points:

1) If we start banning each thing that sea organisms eat that is or might be harmful, then we should ban license plates, wallets, cameras, wrist watches, fishing lines, pants, balls, cell phones, etc. Why did we choose plastic bags? Could it be because it's an easy target for tax revenue?

2) Isn't banning plastic bags in New Jersey (or California), at a time when the US produces 0.9% of all the plastic waste in the ocean, a bit extreme, and more like virtue signaling?


https://www.iswa.org/fileadmin/user...AMERICANA/Science-2015-Jambeck-768-71__2_.pdf

In other words, there's a 99.1% chance that everything in those animals didn't come from here. How has that gotten flipped around so that tax money now flows to the state?

If people are so concerned about the environment here, then wouldn't it make a lot more sense to boycott Chinese goods as a tactic, since it produces 30x as much waste as we do?

 

[imabot]

The irony of course is that:

https://www.sea.edu/plastics/frequently_asked_questions

3) That no one can actually demonstrate how this will ecologically affect the oceans or it's biological processes. Yes, it will be there a long time, but it's speculative if that will actually harm the ocean.

I wasn't limiting my scope. I'm not claiming that some animals out of the hundreds of thousands, or millions or tens of millions of any particular species hasn't been harmed. I'm suggesting that there is no evidence that the ocean ecosystem has been harmed.

Plastics are present in every major ocean basin, concentrated in regions that should be pristine environments far from sources of pollution on land. Plastic debris can threaten marine organisms through entanglement, especially by large debris such as derelict fishing gear, and by ingestion in organisms ranging in size from zooplankton to fish and larger animals such as sea turtles and seabirds. Additionally, plastics create a habitat for microorganisms and other species and can transport potentially invasive species to new regions of the ocean. Plastics are known to carry organic toxins such as PCBs, PBDEs, and PAHs, and may be responsible for the transfer these and other chemicals to marine organisms.

Couldn't plastic waste be ingested by a animal/organism and in turn the animal/organism be ingested along with the ingested plastic and so on?