It shouldn’t be river plastic either though. That’s just pushing the problem back a step instead of solving it outright. It’s a step in the right direction, but it shouldn’t end up in the rivers either…
It shouldn’t be river plastic either though. That’s just pushing the problem back a step instead of solving it outright. It’s a step in the right direction, but it shouldn’t end up in the rivers either…
Yes. That is why I said that I support them.
We cannot fix the fact that the patch is there no. But we most certainly can fix continuing supply of garbage to it. That is exactly the argument I put forth in a different reply. “Oh well; we can just fish out the garbage, so we don’t need to fix the underlying issue of single use plastics.” Complaining about the origin of the pollution is very much not missing the point.
I very much doubt the goal of an organisation like “The Ocean Cleanup” is to get to pick up garbage in perpetuity. I would very much hope, that its end goal is to outlive its own usefulness.
No of course not. It’s the people who have an interest in keeping plastic around, who I fear might use an excuse like that.
How in the heck do you mean? I’m happy for the accomplishment. It’s excellent work. I’m just angry that said work is necessary in the first place.
No one specifically, but in a lot of cases it feels like certain interest groups, tout projects like this as the be all and end all of solving the issue. I just fear for a sentiment where people go: “Look at what “The Ocean Cleanup” is doing! We don’t need to abolish single use plastics. Any that end up in the environment is simply picked up!” That is of course a bit of a caricature, but at this point my trust in humanity as a whole, is not very high…
No doubt it’s good work, but the plastic shouldn’t get in there in the first place. That was my only point.
Same issue though; it shouldn’t end up in the rivers either. The rivers were just an example in relation to the ocean patches specifically. Plastics shouldn’t end up in the environment at all. Catching it a step earlier, is still treating the symptom instead of the cause.
“The Ocean Cleanup” is a great effort and I support their mission wholeheartedly. BUT looking at the bigger picture; it seems completely asinine to fish garbage put of the ocean and call that the solution to pollution, instead of preventing it from getting there in the first place. This is not meant as a criticism of “The Ocean Cleanup”, but of global society in general. One minute you see them removing the Pacific garbage patch and the next you see whole rivers covered in plastic waste flowing out into the ocean from certain countries.
Edit: Fishing it out of the rivers before it enters the ocean is also a good effort. But it doesn’t address the underlying problem any better than cleaning ot out of the ocean. Also; some people seem to think I’m bashing “The Ocean Cleanup” and similar organisations. I’m very much not. They do great, necessary work. I’m just frustrated that said work is needed, and more importantly; that it doesn’t seem to be on track to stop being needed anytime in the near-ish future.
Almost no matter how you do it, it’s going to be a horrible waste of good drinking water to try to extract cooling from the temperature of the water. If you are in a dry climate, make a DIY swamp cooler. Otherwise shell out for a small AC unit.
Also; using your free lease-included water for stuff like that, is probably the quickest way to no longer have water included in your lease…
No fucking way. I ain’t gonna’ die fighting for the inflated egos, of the morons in charge of the world powers and their ass-lickers. I’d gather up my loved ones and leave in a heartbeat, if my country started forced conscription. I’m not enough of a nationalist to die “for king and fatherland”, no matter how much i like this little country.
Domo arigato mister skeleto!
Wonder if they could make an explosive filled Cessna stealthy enough for that…
We take the protection of your personal information very seriously
Fuck, I loathe this corporate bullshit phrase. Obviously you didn’t take it serious enough, now did you? For some reason this phrase really grinds my gears. Fair enough that you had a data breach and so on, but don’t brush off the issue like this…
Well, kinda. Vaccines are tools for “educating” your immune system. Classical vaccines generally work by providing “dead”/harmless examples of a particular infection, so that your immune system will recognize the real thing and stop it early, so it doesn’t develop to much. The immune system takes a while to get going, so “teaching” it in advance makes a huge difference against aggressive, quick acting infections.
The mRNA vaccines skip most of the “learning phase” and provide the body directly with the template to produce the right antibodies. And this is where the “cure”-part comes in. The whole problem with cancer is that it consists of a variation of your own cells. Which is why the immune system won’t target it. It’s not an infection or foreign. To your immune system it’s just another part of you. mRNA can be used to tell the immune system to attack it anyway, leveraging it against the cancer. But it requires a sample of the cells to be attacked, so as to make the right mRNA for the particular instance of cancer. So it’s not really useable as a preventative thing. At least not yet…
Well, the alternative is a good chance of dieing from cancer and/or radiation poisoning. So even if mRNA vaccines did actually mess with DNA, I’d take the chance for a permanent cure.
Yes, but we also have proportional representation in our parliaments. Making gradual ideological change realistic.
No; in a free market without regulation. the bigger fish outcompetes the smaller ones, or buys them outright. Which then is exactly why enshittification works in the first place.
Perhaps a Doro? They have both dumb-phones and simplified smartphones. https://www.doro.com/en-gb/products/mobile-phones/