Posted on 11/07/2006 2:20:00 AM PST by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
WASHINGTON — Old toothbrushes, beach toys and used condoms are part of a vast vortex of plastic trash in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, threatening sea creatures that get tangled in it, eat it or ride on it, a new report says.
Because plastic doesn't break down the way organic material does, ocean currents and tides have carried it thousands of miles to an area between Hawaii and the U.S. West Coast, according to the study by the international environmental group Greenpeace.
This swirling vortex, which can grow to be about the size of Texas, is not far from the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, designated as a protected U.S. national monument in June by President Bush.
The Greenpeace report, "Plastic Debris in the World's Oceans" said at least 267 species -- including seabirds, turtles, seals, sea lions, whales and fish -- are known to have suffered from entanglement or ingestion of marine debris.
Some 80 percent of this debris comes from land and 20 percent from the oceans, the report said, with four main sources: tourism, sewage, fishing and waste from ships and boats.
The new report comes days after the journal Science projected that Earth's stocks of fish and seafood would collapse by 2048 if trends in overfishing and pollution continue.
Two weeks ago, the U.S. Institute of Medicine said the benefits of eating fish outweigh the risks of toxins detected in the animals.
STOMACHS FILLED WITH PLASTIC
Plastic pollution is a problem in all the world's oceans, the Greenpeace report said, but underlined the issue in the Pacific by sailing through the floating garbage dump and capturing images of wildlife interacting with plastic.
"It's not necessarily an area that's clearly defined; it's sort of a natural phenomenon ... wind and salt water break down the plastic," said Steve Smith, aboard the Greenpeace ship Esperanza.
The plastic trash, some in large pieces and others broken down to small but recognizable particles, is visible from the ship's deck, about 50 feet above the ocean surface, Smith said by telephone Friday. Inflatable boats are dispatched from the ship to collect samples.
"We've been been unfortunately finding a lot of stuff out here, floating by, which doesn't paint a very good picture, because some of it is from faraway places, has marine life like barnacles and other little creatures living on the plastic," Smith said.
By hitching rides on plastic debris, invasive species can be carried thousands of miles to interact with native creatures, Smith said. Plastic also poses a hazard to animals that mistake it for prey and eat it, he said.
"Plastics in the oceans act as a toxic sponge, soaking up a lot of the persistent pollutants out here," Smith said. "We've seen photos of albatrosses who eat this plastic ... Even though their stomachs are filled, they end up starving because there's no nutrients in there."
Discarded or lost fishing nets and traps can continue to catch fish when they are no longer in use, the report said.
The report said an international agreement known as MARPOL is aimed at ending the dumping of plastic debris at sea, but noted that since most debris originates on land, even total enforcement of this agreement would not eliminate the problem.
Greenpeace called for a global network of marine reserves, covering 40 percent of the world's oceans, and responsibility by coastal countries to cut down on "excessive consumption" and boost recycling.
I wish there was an easy way to figure out what it is.
Think about harvesting an area the size of texas w9ith even the biggest of combines. Even if you used a spreading collection method, you can't really pull more than about a 200' wide swath at a time. It'd take a while, and a hell of a lot of fuel, too. The crew would probably generate as much trash at they are there to collect.
Exactly! I love saltwater fishing. It's amazing the amount of trash people leave behind, when it would really be no big deal to pack it back to the landing and dispose of it here.
And you propose doing nothing? Instead of gripping about this growing monster, they'd better get started figuring out how to deal with it.
Seems to me, they could use those long fishing nets to capture much more than the 200 ft. swaths you suggested.
we have what should be a wonderful park here in Lorain Ohio, but it is "wall to wall" spray painted graffiti over the rock formations and with litter in every square yard. the creeks banks are nothing but plastic bottle trash.
Yes, you could pull a wider swath, but the amount of power goes up exponentially. To get that power, you'd have to burn really massive amounts of fuel. Even if you double it, it would take a couple years to cover the field they describe for a single vessel.
With UV and saltwater exposure, the plastics break down in 5-8 months in most cases. Is it really worth it to catch the plastics? Then what do you do with them?
I am not saying that nothing should be done, but it would be better to keep the cow in the barn rather than chase it after it escapes. Source elimination of the problem is a better solution.
There are no easy answers here, even if greenpeace is telling the truth about the magnitude of he problem.
"...boats are dispatched from the ship to collect samples."
Well, lemmesee...you sailed all the way out there to make a big stink about the mess...um...how about just picking up the trash and shut yer piehole. Fercryinoutloud.
Since several billion people rely on fish for their protein, having to farm grain and then farm fish is much less efficient and intelligent use of resources than limiting "wild" fishing to a sustainable harvest.
Several billion people can really run thru a hell of a lot of fish! Maybe it's time to wean them on to something else. Soylent green comes to mind!
I think a crew of select FReepers on a 100 foot yacht should conduct a extensive survey.
Reuters and Greenpeace certainly aren't reputable sources but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I've seen this myself. It's disgusting. It's true that animals get killed by eating plastic.
We had some fun at Al's expense (or should that be expanse) over here...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1732885/posts
Obviously, FAT ALBERT is no stranger to the dinner table...and getting more familier every day.
Hey Nazi, you lost all credibility right there.
I'll take fantail watch with my fishing poles & beer coolers. :)
Well the Europeans and Japanese are doing their part by reducing their population naturally. The US is only at stable population when you eliminate immigration. Better access to birth control might send the population into reverse.
The Chinese population will start to shrink once it peaks in a few years too.
It is just those Arabs and Africans who can't stop breeding it would seem.
Although I think I just baited a large number of people with that last comment, the reality of my statement is that the richer you get, the greater the likelihood that you population goes down. It also lowers resource use, but could theoretically make you richer per person.
At the end of the day 70 people using 100 units of resources have less per person than 40 people using 80 units even though resource use is lower.
The earth is a paradise with 2 billion people. It will be hell with 10.
No, actually you did. On word 2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
What a maroon.
1) While I agree fully, when my dog ate some yellow balloons, guess what appeared in the back yard a day later?
2) Lake Winnipesaukee (NH) was filled with fully-potable drinking water in the 60s. Now the most frequent floating contaminant is empty "Poland Spring" water bottles! See any irony in that?
Didn't go to your link. I know all about it. This "rapture nut" will see you around the forum.
NOAA SCIENTISTS BATTLE OCEAN GHOSTNETS
April 29, 2005 — Thousands of miles from any human habitation, fishing nets hundreds of meters long and balls of net tens of meters across, lost or abandoned by their former owners but still an environmental hazard, foul huge swaths of the Pacific Ocean. However, the sheer mass of those so-called ghostnets floating freely in waves has come as an unpleasant surprise to NOAA scientists studying the phenomenon. (Click NOAA image for larger view of turtle entangled in fishing net. Click here for high resolution version, which is a large file. Please credit “NOAA.”)
Concentrated in relatively small areas of ocean by winds and currents, ghostnets present a hazard to wildlife, entangling marine mammals, turtles and sea birds and a largely unseen form of environmental pollution.
Because the synthetic materials currently used in fishing nets decay extremely slowly, they can continue to drift for years. Many end up trapped on the coral reefs, where entanglement rates are even higher than in the open ocean and where they damage the fragile coral.
The nets not only damage the reefs, but are extremely costly and time-consuming to remove.
One strategy to prevent the reef damage is to develop a way to predict where in the open ocean the debris is likely to accumulate and from which clean-up is much easier.
NOAA scientists are using satellite and other technologies to predict area where current and winds combine to funnel and accumulate debris into what are called convergence zones. However, a recent field deployment to confirm that the satellites accurately predicted the existence of a possible convergence zone off Hawaii gave a first substantive look into the severity of the ghostnet problem in the open ocean.
According to James Churnside, a researcher with the NOAA Environmental Technology Laboratory in Boulder, Colo., the bottom line is that, “There is a lot more trash out there than I expected."
Using data from several satellites, scientists from the NOAA Satellite and Information Service and the NOAA Fisheries Service tracked the Pacific convergence zone through the winter. The data they collected were combined with more recent satellite data to determine the most likely areas to find aggregations of debris.
In late March and early April, Churnside headed a field survey of areas in the Pacific from a NOAA P-3 Orion Aircraft based in Honolulu. The survey was joint project of NOAA and Airborne Technologies, Inc. of Wasilla, Alaska.
Over three days, the plane overflew the convergence zone to allow scientists to make visual observations and to use an electronic imaging system with automated pattern recognition to determine how much and what kinds of debris had accumulated.
Churnside said that about 2,000 individual pieces of debris were seen. These included at least 100 that were identified as nets or pieces of net. A number were balls of net up to 10 meters (30 feet) across.
"One piece of driftnet that was still stretched out, and presumably still fishing, was 200-300 meters long," Churnside said.
Although surprised by just how much material was found in the convergence zone, Churnside said that a lot of analysis will need to be done to sort out whether convergence zones are more efficient at trapping debris than predicted or whether there simply is much more material floating free and available for capture than suspected.
"Those are the two possibilities, and we don't have data yet to pick one or the other," he said. Meanwhile, based on the success of the Orion flights, planning is underway to develop a cost-effective removal effort. There are also plans to use unmanned aerial vehicles instead of the larger Orion to identify and track the debris in the convergence zones. A pilot project for at-sea removal could begin as early as next year.
This year, NOAA has also undertaken efforts to re-establish a centralized marine debris capability within the agency. The NOAA Office of Response and Restoration is coordinating these efforts by working with Churnside and other NOAA scientists to bring together, strengthen and increase the visibility of activities related to the prevention, reduction and mitigation of debris in the marine environment. One area of focus will be coordinating activities that identify and reduce the impacts of sea-based sources of marine debris (i.e. fishing nets and derelict gear) on endangered, threatened or protected species, and sensitive habitats in United States waters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.