[GHung]

In a lot of places they call the old infrastructure 'artificial reefs'. They provide great habitat for fish and other sea creatures. Sinking stuff in the GOM to create artificial reefs is common these days. If these structures are considered a shipping hazard, decommissioning is a simple matter of planting a few charges 15-20 meters down. Boom!

I can think of a lot of other things we'll leave behind that future generations will need to worry about much more.

[Newfie]

And we should not leave them behind either. And yes they will be a hazard to navigation. And blowing them up is a great way to kill whole lots of sea animals. But even that won’t happen unless there is a fund to pay for it.

FWIW, I would attach a $1 a bag fee on all shopping bag to go to a General super fund clean up account.

I care about my kids future, I’m funny that way.

And while we are at it the China trade deal should have a clause dealing with all the plastic crap they are dumping.

[GHung]

And we should not leave them behind either. And yes they will be a hazard to navigation........

There's that "should" word. As I said, we have a long, long list of "shoulds". We're going to reach the age of prioritizing and triage soon enough. I'm betting seaside nuke plants will be much higher on that list than some steel and concrete structures that "should" be well marked on your charts. Or maybe we should get a head start with stuff like this:



Eighty+ years after its demise, I don't see any sense of urgency about cleaning up Flagler's Folly. I may have more sea time than you do and I've seen stuff like this all over the world. Nobody seems to be making it a priority to clean it up. It's EVERYWHERE.

[Pops]

Everyone of us make choices every day that affect the environment.

I'd guess a million concrete footings don't do the damage that the caps from 50 billion water bottles do, every year.

[Newfie]

And we should not leave them behind either. And yes they will be a hazard to navigation........

There's that "should" word. As I said, we have a long, long list of "shoulds". We're going to reach the age of prioritizing and triage soon enough. I'm betting seaside nuke plants will be much higher on that list than some steel and concrete structures that "should" be well marked on your charts. Or maybe we should get a head start with stuff like this:



Eighty+ years after its demise, I don't see any sense of urgency about cleaning up Flagler's Folly. I may have more sea time than you do and I've seen stuff like this all over the world. Nobody seems to be making it a priority to clean it up. It's EVERYWHERE.

I completely agree, it SHOULD be removed. And not just at sea but on the land as well. The total cost of anything should be included including the cost of removal and proper disposal. I know they have his for tires in NJ. But I don’t don’t know if that’s a state or Federal law.

Anyway I’m tired of see us shit in our bed everywhere.

I can’t tell if you are agreeing with me or saying it’s OK to leave this crap around.

[Newfie]

Yes Pops, everywhere. Doesn’t make it right.

We offshores a lot of production and a lot of pollution. But it also seems to be at least a little bit cultural. Last year in Luperon, DR I was suprised how clean the small town was. We spent a couple of night in Santo Domingo and the river there was a trash heap. It seems there is a correlation between population density and trash. Not always though. I hate it when going through a woods and I find dumped allliances and household crap. Sometimes on the road to the dump.

It’s not great thing to be proud of to be human. We Tenno more difficult than a pre K lesson, pick up after yourself.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Everyone of us make choices every day that affect the environment.

I'd guess a million concrete footings don't do the damage that the caps from 50 billion water bottles do, every year.

Even for people who meticulously throw them away in the garbage? Even for people who tend to refill the bottles at least 10 times before using a new one?

To me, bottled water is mainly a convenient container, with a cap. (And yes, in a public place, especially a Dr's office, I sure as hell DO want a cap. And yes, I do have a medical condition (side effects of BP medicines) which make me having water conveniently available a very desirable thing).

Every metal, plastic, etc. bottle to haul around water in (i.e. the permanent kind) has various problems, some of which look pretty nasty.

Let's not pretend that bottled water has to be the bane of civilization, even as certain folks around here pretend it's meat, taxes, guns, etc.

[Pops]

That pic of a baby albatross was taken on Midway, newf, which I believe is about as far from people as you can get on the surface. 60 Minutes did a thing on them back a few weeks.

My smug point was simply that we are killing everything with our smallest nonchalant daily choices so if we do leave some additional rubble on the seafloor in a deliberate attempt to lower whatever emissions it might still be a net positive on balance.

[Pops]

Even for people who meticulously throw them away in the garbage? Even for people who tend to refill the bottles at least 10 times before using a new one.

The factoid I read was only 25% or so are recycled.

Which was likely before China stopped accepting plastic to recycle early in 2018.

Which in turn was likely a result of the much lower price for ethylene — one of those worthless byproducts of fracking Pete is always carping about— that fell through the floor in 2014.

[Newfie]

Yes we all contribute to some degree. And no I don’t agree that some foundations in the sea fooornare a positive note.

FIRST REDUCE

We waste enoumous amounts of everything.

I’m a big advocate of DEGROWTH. Learn to live with what you have. Those windmills are not helping anything, they are just another form of expansion, feeding the problem.

[ROCKMAN]

Ghung - Dropping old oil production platforms to the bottom of the GOM is a decades old Federal program for the benefits you described. And about 25 years ago the Feds approved a method of leaving deep portions (100' or more below sea level) in place since they had already essentially became artificial reefs: cut the upper 100' off and drop in deep water. Mark remaining structure with a permanent buoy maintained by the states. The states receive a one time payment ($5 million?) from the oil company. Texas also has a program of sinking old ships in deeper water for reef building.

The Texas artificial reefs are by far the most productive areas off our coast. We have to hard bottoms off our coast for natural reef development so it's something of a barren "desert".

[rockdoc123]

The Texas artificial reefs are by far the most productive areas off our coast. We have to hard bottoms off our coast for natural reef development so it's something of a barren "desert".

years ago before the hurricane hit there was a huge aquarium in New Orleans that had a large tank near the entrance lobby that contained a small rig structure. The idea was to show how a natural reef formed. The tank was pretty amazing with a couple of sea turtles a few huge tarpons and two whale sharks.

[Newfie]

Dropping oil platforms 100’ below sea level and sinking ships for artificial reefs is far different from surface level concrete structures or aging bridges.

Or coal mines, or chemical factories, or old tires.

Are some of you truly arguing against cleaning up the environment?

[Pops]

Newf that's quite the strawman you have there, LOL. I don't know about anyone else but I can't figure your argument, concrete footings are pretty inert when compared to CO2 and PO which are not inert. I'm pretty sure that either the footings that never get removed would either be too deep to interfere with any likely traffic or they don't get removed because the world has gone to pot in which case they are way down the list of worries, even a sailor's. Regardless protecting the environment is about the weirdest argument against RE I've seen.
Unless this about trump thinking GW is a China hoax, in which case I give up. LOL

[KaiserJeep]

This is what happens to abandonned chunks of concrete in the oceans:


Any questions?