Quote:"we have a thousand mile wide plastic dump floating in the Pacific Ocean."
Quote"Plastic stays around essentially forever, so it's certainly not something we want producing any more of than necessary."Yes and no.
Regarding plastic staying around forever, plastic most certainly does not stay around forever and bacteria are eating it in the oceans.
Marine microbes digest plastic This is also why tar from oil seaps on the ocean floor also doesn't stay around forever, due to bacteria. This is why tire dust doesn't fill the streets. And why tar roads break down into slightly rocky dirt after enough time. I find bpa type molecules in plastics more of a consern then the plastic themselves and since as a society we're moving away from plastics with bpa hormone disruptors in our plastics, I am less and less worried about plastics released into the environment.
So yes we have a huge patch of ocean that has floating garbage that breaks up into smaller pieces though photo degradation. And that patch would be a lot bigger and denser if not for bacterial action after the pieces have broken up.
Quote: "We need to stop burying shit in landfills (or flowing it into the oceans), period. That's the core message."
No, sure cleaning up the rivers is a great idea. But landfills full of trash are resources, as is farm land taken over by suburbia that is full of trees, topiaries and grass, calcium dry wall you can mix with soil, copper pipes in walls, I think
these things all represent a huge rainy day fund for western society and I think could save millions of lives if TSHTF hard. These are resources and they could protect our society from a hard crash. Many people feel concern that a hard crash is a very real possibility after an oil resource collapse and other kinds of collapses can and do happen from time to time. Economic collapses happen, environmental catastrophes happen ranging from war, meteors, a super volcano or even an EM from the sun. A lot of bad things can happen and have happened on earth. Backup resources can protect a society by softening the impact of those things.
I think we need to be saving energy and resources for our future even if there was only a slim chance of a hard oil/energy transition.
And really the only way as a capitalist society that we can convince people to save resources is to encourage people to throw resources away and bury them in a landfill. Or to grow trees on farmland with houses made of kindling and copper pipes aka suburbia. In my opinion, I see Suburbia, forests and land fills as all possible rainy day fund resources in the future.
Sure landfills aren't sustainability, but they do offer
resilience. Presently our society is definitely not putting enough resources towards reaching sustainability. And based on
club of Rome business as usual scenario, we may have passed the point in resources available where we can't transition to a comfortable sustainable society. So we should look to maintaining elements that provide us resilience if we crash instead of making a soft sustainable landing. Land fills offer resilience, because they are full of resources that only a desperate society would use.
Regarding the trees that have been saved by not using paper, this is very true and an excellent trend. This trend started with the oil age as oil and coal were cheaper fuels for home heating then wood. Most of New England was treeless before coal and oil, due to deforestation for fuel.
If we experience an oil/energy crash, the trees that have been growing for 100 years are protecting farmable land and gathering solar resources that could be used for heating saving millions in a SHTF scenario. If we experience a major economic disruption, oil crash, what have you, trees and the land they are on are a very important resource and could save a lot of lives. Just for the protection they offer future generations, I think might be worth the environmental damage plastic bags cause. The trees we have today may someday save many lives in the future if we go though a difficult transition after oil.
Also I think that plastic that is packed away into garbage dumps is a chemical feedstock resource for future generations. Plastic in trash dumps sequesters carbon and I think of it as another future resource. What about paper bags? In many trash dumps paper degrades producing methane, which can be captured and burnt, but if it is not, paper is another methane source and not a good way to sequester carbon or a good way to store future resources.
So that said, I vote for plastic.
George Carlin wrote:...The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we’re gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, ’cause that’s what it does. It’s a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed. And if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: the
earth plus plastic. The earth doesn’t share our prejudice toward plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn’t know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, “Why are we here?”
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/251836- ... g-now-save
"The multiplication force of technology on cognitive differences is massive." -Jordan Peterson