Was the dead whale that had 1,000 plastic pieces in its stomach posted?
https://www.google.com/search?sourc...0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131j0i10.1qEM0JeMElI
https://www.google.com/search?sourc...0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131j0i10.1qEM0JeMElI
Was the dead whale that had 1,000 plastic pieces in its stomach posted?
It was done to draw attention to an issue that is happening around the planet. There are many cases showing up of beached whales with bellies full of plastics. Birds too.I looked up that google link and found this photo. I thought it looked staged.
Then a bit more searching found the article header below.
Damn it, fake photos do not help the cause
Headline: "Sperm Whale Stuffed with 64 Pounds of Plastic Washes Up Dead In ..."
Byline: The Inertia
A representation created by Greenpeace Philippines. While it's not real, it's getting....
View attachment 234901
Yup, no doubt done with the best intentions. But this photo is also being "shopped" around to support the cause without letting viewers know it is staged. Sometimes this leads to more harm than good. You know how it goes, making a strong argument against plastic pollution and someone points out the photo is fake and you just lost half the room. Just my POV.It was done to draw attention to an issue that is happening around the planet. There are many cases showing up of beached whales with bellies full of plastics. Birds too.
It will take some Govt intervention simply because large swaths of the population will not just "do the right thing" like so many here on this forum will. But a lot can be done with small changes. Either way I wont lose any sleep about things i cant control.
I struggle with some of the same questions and also try to "live green" within reason (whatever "reason" means).It stinks that it seems so many say the answer is government regulation because industry and social responsibility it too slow to pick up on the issue at hand. So we claim we need more regulation, more government, less freedom, more constraints on the free economy, less capitalism, more socialism, more recycling, less consumerism. It seems that a general statement could be made that most things that are good for the economy are bad for the environment. So much technology that makes our lives “better” also makes the long term livability of the planet shorter. Is a huge meteor or volcano more likely to destroy life as we know it, or will it be man, or will we be able to save this planet until it is ultimately swallowed up by our sun in a supernova?
These questions leave me wondering if picking plastic plates and cups out of the trash at parties, and carefully sorting trash from less environmentally responsible people is worth it. And what recyclable materials that I’m trying to clean with tap water are worth the tap water I’m using clean them. Are they helping or hurting the recycling facility’s profitability?
How should I be spending my life’s time here to try and extend the livability of this planet? I pick up the trash and recycle what I can almost everywhere I go. I use everything I can to it’s fullest extent. I’m a recycler, but not a great consumer. I still drive a gasoline vehicle, use natural gas to heat my home, run multiple computers at once, leave lights on, and even have several incandescent bulbs in my house. Heck, there are many parts of my home that need better insulation.
Is plastic the problem? Or is it just what is most in our faces at the moment. It seems global warming and the constant killing of green spaces that turn CO2 into Hydrocarbons and O2 are what we need the most. It makes me think I should go live in the woods, but then I’d probably end up killing more trees. Maybe instead I should try to buy green space to preserve. Can we buy portions of the ocean to make ocean farms?
Who will save this planet?
LOL,... that's hilarious!Our own species' quality of life would almost certainly increase if we were able to tap our superior intellect and exercise some self control.
I've found this to be a pretty low hurdle to get over. Now I'm working on remembering to get the bloody things out of the trunk before I hike into the store. (Although a few experiences of going back out to the car have been helpful in jogging my memory, lol!)For me, the biggest hurtle would be keeping a set of bags in each car, so I had them with me when the wife called and asked me to swing by the grocery store,
I picked up a reusable shopping bag from Home Depot some years back use the heck out of it. I like it better than the flowered ones my wife got.I've found this to be a pretty low hurdle to get over. Now I'm working on remembering to get the bloody things out of the trunk before I hike into the store. (Although a few experiences of going back out to the car have been helpful in jogging my memory, lol!)
But that's human nature. The logic of self-interest is based on greed and sloth. 'Twas ever thus. The solution is not to complain that people won't pick up after themselves, but to structure the rules of the game to make the path of least resistance lead to the best outcome (assuming we can figure out what that might be, of course). Often this action has to take place at the level of the entire society, which means government. This does not negate the role of individual responsibility, because every little bit helps, and someone has to set an example, but large-scale problems often need large-scale (and sometimes coercive) solutions.It stinks that it seems so many say the answer is government regulation because industry and social responsibility it too slow to pick up on the issue at hand.
Same result as a tax or surcharge or deposit. Levying a tax on Mfg for single use non biodegradable products they produce will quicky lead to that same Mfg finding a way to make it biodegradable or at least easily recycled. The old adage applies:Whenever you tax something you get less of it, subsidize it, you get more.
I mentioned this in another topic, but I think doing this is pretty critical for being able to move to a future where AI and automation will begin replacing the need for humans to work.In our linear economy we pay at least twice for the privilege of consumption. Once to buy the item and then again as our tax dollars pay for the ever more costly means of collection and disposal. Often we pay even more in increase pollution and health issues. In a circular economy disposal is eliminated or minimal at worst case. Can this work? Visit the Netherlands and Germany as good examples. They still buy beer and yoghurt and still recycle vigorously but the number of landfills has dramatically been reduced and single-use plastics are getting phased out.
It's a horrific mess. Microplastics are showing up in the bloodstreams of most fish now.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/from-fish-to-humans-a-microplastic-invasion-may-be-taking-a-toll/
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2019/05/microplastics-impact-on-fish-shown-in-pictures/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6132564/
It is a big enough problem that legislation was put in place to ban them. It's an issue for septic systems too, but not as much as microfibers from synthetic clothing, especially fleece. Microbeads and fibers can pass thru to the soil distribution where they may eventually plug when your septic drain field filter. Also, when a system tank is pumped, where is it dumped?When we found out the "exfoliates" in many liquid soaps are simply small plastic beads we stopped using them. We have a septic tank, so theoretically they can't escape into the ground water, but it's the thought that counts, right?