Ironically a lot of clothing designed to keep people warm has synthetic fibres for the insulating layer and the fibres were manufactured by recycling some types of plastic bottles, what for a while appeared to be a good way to deal with some plastic waste that would otherwise be landfill is now creating a different problem.
GH
as does my dog but he doesnt keep posting s**te on usenet
'twas ever so
NT
Before or after shooting the culprits? ;>
Essentially just build urban incinerators that do CHP
+1 I blame the media, and possibly the education system. People aren't taught to question anything these days, and when it comes to science and technology, the media are totally ignorant, and that originates in their schooling.
+1
The plastic is often floating about.
I think its because they do not seem to erode like natural materials do. Organisms have evolved tolive with natural materials, but plastic is man made and has long chain molecular construction that can cause issues with scarring of tissue and reduction in the ability of certain membranes to work correctly. Brian
Because the environmentalists insist on biodegradable plastics.. they break down into micro bits. The micro bits get into places that haven't evolved to cope with them and cause unpredictable problems. Its like particulates from diesel, you don't know what they will do until they do it.
We don't want them in urban areas.. put them in villages so less people suffer the problems.
Is it? The example above certainly implied that the bucket of "stuff from the bottom of the river" contained most/all of the plastic that they were worried about.
Most plastics sink.
Aha, someone who actually has a sensible answer to my original question, thanks Brian. That does make some sort of sense at least though the risks are probably rather more subtle than most people assume I think.
Usually the same people who oppose nuclear power...
If you haven't seen it, look up Rhod Gilberts rant about packaged potatoes on YouTube.
"They come as two, sir." "You did that !"
Which maintains a system where we have to import expertise, and can get rid of it when it's done without having it do silly things like vote or get involved in politics. (And without having to pay its pension).
If the UK wanted bright, literate, engaged citizens, it would have them. If we've learned nothing from the past 50 years, it's that the UK - as a whole - demonstrably doesn't like education.
One problem is simply reaction time. They might take years to get going.
Like microbes that can turn grass cuttings directly to alcohol. If we could find a way of speeding them up by a factor of 1,000, we might be able to make economic gasohol.
But it is not as if there are not plenty of tough, natural long chain materials which we (and other animals) have been ingesting for millions of years. Chitin, collagen, cellulose, etc. A bit like the idea that anything with chemicals in it must be bad (not that I am accusing Brian of subscribing to that).
Except that the "disperse" philosophy has gone a bit out of fashion. If they are properly engineered and operated, why should they cause problems? And CHP is undoubtedly efficient
A huge incinerator was put in close to a village in central Cornwall a few years ago. Waste heat is used to generate enough electricity to power the equivalent of 21,000 homes, they say.
There was the usual outcry against it during the planning stages, but assurances were given that it would operate to the highest environmental standards, with the combustion temperatures and flue gas compositions being monitored continuously etc etc. I don't think anyone asked why, in that case, did it need such a tall chimney!
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required