Skip to main content

The Great Garbage Patch- the nastiest of all plastic dumps

I only just heard about what is called "The Great Garbage Patch" this week. It's a massive floating dump in the Pacific made up of plastic that collects and malingers, growing daily and destroying sea life in its path.

It's the size of 2 Texases (some say 2 continental North Americas) as of now (2008).  A heaving mass of junk stuck in the Pacific gyre, a system of currents that provide the right conditions to magnetise all of the plastic debris chucked into the Pacific from land and ships.


So how is it I have only heard about it now? I keep up on environmental news, I always read the NYTimes science sections, National Geographic, eco blogs - the types of publications that should be covering this type of thing.

After all, the great garbage patch is massive: physically, environmentally and symbolically.

And scientists have been studying it for years, so why the lack of coverage, and action to get rid of it?

Maybe because it's hidden - the parameters of the great garbage patch start about 750 miles off of US shores and inhabit chunks of the Pacific rarely traveled by non-cargo ships.

Maybe because it's insidious - much of the plastic that makes up the patch has been broken down into tiny fragments that look like plankton, thus coining a phrase used by many oceanographers that it is like a massive sea of plastic soup. The marine life actually thinks the plastic fragments are plankton and ingest them regularly - thus killing off many animals. And for those that survive, ensuring plastic works its way into our food chain.

It's a massive, awful reminder of just how problematic the proliferation of plastic is. And with an estimated 80% of the garbage patch waste coming from land (i.e. the US) and 20% coming from passing ships, it seems criminal that such dumping practices have not been caught and punished.

It's also another reminder that the only way plastic can ever have a safe and useful place is when it's recycled and reused. The minute it is disposed of, even in sensible ways, it becomes an environmental hazard either leaking chemicals into the ground or polluting our oceans on a scale that seems unfathomable.

Plastic bottles, plastic bags, plastic food containers - they are a convenience, not a necessity, and have a huge environmental cost and health costs that are just now being understood.

More importantly, why is there no international body regulating massive, global problems like this? Can't we find a collective way to start to clean the mess up? Can't we prosecute and heavily fine ships that dump and land side dumpers? What's the point of governments if they don't deal with issues like this?

Learn more:

+ Alphabet Soup: A Look at Pollution in the Ocean (video part 1)
+ Alphabet Soup: A Look at Pollution in the Ocean (video part 2)
+ World's biggest garbage dump: plastic in the ocean (video)
+ Great garbage patch info site
+ The world's rubbish tip (in The Independent)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why isn't all packaging recyclable?

It's been an interesting week trying to buy household products and food only made from recyclable packaging. A mixed bag. Literally. For example, I just made a rocket (arugula) salad with fresh mozzarella. The rocket I bought from Waitrose last week was in a recyclable bag made from recycled plastic. However, the rocket I bought from Sainbury's today was in a bag that did not have the recyclable sign, nor was it made from recycled plastic. The Sainsbury's mozzarella was equally guilty. However, Sainsbury's does use some bags that are recyclable, mainly for their organic products. Less confusing were the products in cardboards boxes/cartons and aluminum packaging. All clearly recyclable. And almost all of the plastic packaging we bought was recyclable apart from a few random items we bought at Marks and Spencers and the lunch spot Eat. Things like salad containers that looked like they were candidates for the recycling pile turned out not to have any recycling symbols...

The problem with flying

Everyone who knows me knows that I hate flying. It's loud, uncomfortable, confining and if things go wrong there's no way out. (I'm an advocate of parachutes under seat, not inflatable vests.) But the real reason I hate flying these days is the environmental impact. a) Apparently you're better off driving to your destination, alone , even if it's thousands of miles away, than being on a full plane. That's how bad the fuel consumption is. b) Planes dump their emissions in the most delicate part of the stratosphere and there's nothing to help mitigate the damage. For all of the pollution cars create, we have our plant life down here to help soften the blow. c) They are noisy, booming things and no matter where we go, we seem to be able to hear one or see one, even the far hills of Scotland. d) The amount of packaging they use per passenger is amazing. When my husband recently flew on a short haul flight to Amsterdam, he asked the air steward if they recy...

Relieving your travel guilt with carbon neutralization packages

Brother Ren, who shall now be called Research Ren as he is better at it than I am, has sent in this guilt-alleviating website which allows anyone to purchase carbon neutrlaization packages. + Carbon Neutral Question you may have: What is a carbon neautralization package? Is it something that can only be purchased at Star Trek conventions? Answer: These packages plant trees to help absorb the nastiness left in the air from your flight to the Maldives. It will also calculate how much CO2 you emit on flights based on your destination as well as CO2 you emit with your car mileage. It's a smart site, easy to use and I feel more green-angelic just for looking at it. We're taking the Eurostar/TGV to a wedding in the south of France in 2 weeks rather than flying but we still have all of those air miles to make up for from our London-NY-San Fran-LA-London trip so looks like we'll be using this site's offerings to help to plant a small forest somewhere. (Though I do wonder how ...