Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway5752 | Hacker News Reader

https://www.vox.com/down-to-earth/22949475/ocean-plastic-pol...

It will kill marine life, it will cause further pollution, and it won't address the root cause. It is only one of 5 oceanic garbage patches.

They should focus on preventing pollution at the source. This is misguided, even though they mean well.

View on HN

They do also work on intercepting from rivers [0], but what do you propose? We should just leave all that garbage in the ocean and just try not to look at it?

[0]: https://theoceancleanup.com/rivers/

We already have a giant 380 mile barrier sticking out in the ocean that can catch washed up trash. It's called Florida!

You tell me. What would happen if we left "all that garbage in the ocean and just try not to look at it" ? What if all the effort and funding was focused on the waste production problem and materials problem instead of trying to collecting it in the open ocean? How long would it take for the waste to fall to the seafloor and then be covered by falling sediment? What is the EROI of both approaches?

I am convinced they mean well and are trying to tackle a tractable problem, but the garbage patch cleanup is not a good use of limited resources.

This organization also has projects about stopping plastic in rivers from entering the ocean. Maybe this isn't the ultimate source, but it's literally upstream of the ocean. This is more of a "yes and" situation -- we need both.

https://theoceancleanup.com/rivers/

I generally agree that the root cause should be addressed first (student debt is a great example) and the good news is that I believe this project is tackling both simultaneously.

From the article

>They aim to achieve this goal through a dual strategy: intercepting in rivers to stop the flow and cleaning up what has already accumulated in the ocean.

They are already doing that

Reply on news.ycombinator.com