Technology, Science and the Environment.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

Human society really does suck:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/15/38-million-pieces-of-plastic-waste-found-on-uninhabited-south-pacific-island

Yeah, I mean who'd sit on an island and count them all.

[Vardinio'sCat]

8 hours ago, FIF said:

Yeah, I mean who'd sit on an island and count them all.

 

If they were paying. I would happily volunteer. I could use a suntan. 

 

Big story on this from Manchester today, we are absolutely swimming in the stuff. If they start to find this inside humans, in a similar way to the fine particulates from air pollution, there will be a lot of hand wringing.

 

I wonder how much you get in the average tin of tuna? 

 

[Buce]

5 minutes ago, Vardinio'sCat said:

 

If they were paying. I would happily volunteer. I could use a suntan. 

 

Big story on this from Manchester today, we are absolutely swimming in the stuff. If they start to find this inside humans, in a similar way to the fine particulates from air pollution, there will be a lot of hand wringing.

 

I wonder how much you get in the average tin of tuna? 

 

2

 

There's no need to worry about that.

 

I don't eat fish.

[davieG]

Microplastics are 'littering' riverbeds

By Victoria GillScience correspondent, BBC News

5 hours ago

Share this with Facebook

 

Share this with Twitter

 

Share

Media captionWatch: A look under the microscope to discover the hidden microplastics lurking in our waters

Microscopic plastic beads, fragments and fibres are littering riverbeds across the UK - from rural streams to urban waterways.

This is according to a study that analysed sediments from rivers in north-west England.

Scientists from the University of Manchester tested river sediments at 40 sites throughout Greater Manchester and found "microplastics everywhere".

There is evidence that such small particles can enter the food chain.

Image copyrightJAMIE WOODWARD

Image captionPlastic microbeads, like these recovered from the River Mersey, are now banned in cosmetics in the UK

The findings, published in the journal Nature Geoscience, are the first from a "systematic basin-wide" study, the researchers say.

In a first round of tests, just one of the sites - in the upper reaches of the River Goyt, which is one of the tributaries of the River Mersey - contained no plastic. But when the researchers returned to that site to repeat their test, that area had become contaminated.

"I think that it is likely that there are even higher concentrations in some of the large rivers passing through global megacities," said lead researcher Dr Rachel Hurley.

"We just need to get out there and see. We still don't know the full scale of the microplastic problem," she told BBC News.

"Wherever you have people and industry, you will have high levels of microplastic," added Prof Jamie Woodward, from Manchester University's School of Geography.

'Plastic hotspots'

Image copyrightJ WOODWARD

Image captionSome parts of the River Tame contained more than half a million plastic particles per square metre of riverbed

To analyse river sediments, researchers isolated patches of riverbed and measured the concentration within those patches.

Some urban "hotspots" contained hundreds of thousands of plastic particles per square metre. This included a site at the River Tame in Denton - a downstream, suburban stretch of river - that contained more than half a million plastic particles per square metre.

"According to our literature search on microplastics in the ocean, in sediments on beaches, in lakes - and the small amount of data on rivers elsewhere - this is currently the highest concentration found anywhere," said Prof Woodward.

The scientists now want to investigate the specific sources of the plastic fibres, microbeads and fragments they found.

One recent study in the US linked wastewater treatment plants with the release of plastic into the environment. And the scientists think that wastewater is likely to make a large contribution - particularly of microfibres from synthetic clothing and microbeads.

"We welcomed the ban on microbeads in personal care products introduced earlier this year," said Prof Woodward. "And we want to monitor the effect of that ban.

"But microbeads are also used in industrial processes - in the moulding of larger plastic products. So there are likely to be multiple sources.

"In urban environments, microplastics may come from wastewater and sewer systems, from plastic litter that is broken up and fragmented, and even from the air. Sources may not be active all of the time, so they are difficult to track - but we are working on it!" said Dr Hurley.

Flushed by flooding

Image copyrightJAMIE WOODWARD

Image captionEven rural stream beds are contaminated with microplastics

The researchers gathered their first set of samples prior to the winter floods of 2015 and 2016. That extreme flooding was particularly severe in their river system - when weeks of heavy rain wreaked havoc in northern England, Northern Ireland and parts of Wales.

The team returned to the sites to see if the levels of plastic had changed. This revealed that the floods had "flushed out" approximately 70% of the microplastics stored in these riverbeds, equivalent to almost a tonne of plastic, or nearly 50 billion particles. It also eradicated microbead contamination at seven sites.

So the rivers are able to "cleanse themselves", the researchers explained. But, as Prof Woodward pointed out, "all of that will ultimately end up in the ocean".

Dr James Rothwell added that, since many of the particles this study detected were so small, they would simply slip through the filtration nets that are used, as standard, to sift microplastics out of the ocean.

"The implications of that are that we might well be underestimating by several orders of magnitude how much microplastic is in the oceans that has been delivered by rivers - flushed out during flood events," he said.

[Vardinio'sCat]

On 3/12/2018 at 22:16, davieG said:

Microplastics are 'littering' riverbeds

By Victoria GillScience correspondent, BBC News

5 hours ago

Share this with Facebook

 

Share this with Twitter

 

Share

Media captionWatch: A look under the microscope to discover the hidden microplastics lurking in our waters

Microscopic plastic beads, fragments and fibres are littering riverbeds across the UK - from rural streams to urban waterways.

This is according to a study that analysed sediments from rivers in north-west England.

Scientists from the University of Manchester tested river sediments at 40 sites throughout Greater Manchester and found "microplastics everywhere".

There is evidence that such small particles can enter the food chain.

Image copyrightJAMIE WOODWARD

Image captionPlastic microbeads, like these recovered from the River Mersey, are now banned in cosmetics in the UK

The findings, published in the journal Nature Geoscience, are the first from a "systematic basin-wide" study, the researchers say.

In a first round of tests, just one of the sites - in the upper reaches of the River Goyt, which is one of the tributaries of the River Mersey - contained no plastic. But when the researchers returned to that site to repeat their test, that area had become contaminated.

"I think that it is likely that there are even higher concentrations in some of the large rivers passing through global megacities," said lead researcher Dr Rachel Hurley.

"We just need to get out there and see. We still don't know the full scale of the microplastic problem," she told BBC News.

"Wherever you have people and industry, you will have high levels of microplastic," added Prof Jamie Woodward, from Manchester University's School of Geography.

'Plastic hotspots'

Image copyrightJ WOODWARD

Image captionSome parts of the River Tame contained more than half a million plastic particles per square metre of riverbed

To analyse river sediments, researchers isolated patches of riverbed and measured the concentration within those patches.

Some urban "hotspots" contained hundreds of thousands of plastic particles per square metre. This included a site at the River Tame in Denton - a downstream, suburban stretch of river - that contained more than half a million plastic particles per square metre.

"According to our literature search on microplastics in the ocean, in sediments on beaches, in lakes - and the small amount of data on rivers elsewhere - this is currently the highest concentration found anywhere," said Prof Woodward.

The scientists now want to investigate the specific sources of the plastic fibres, microbeads and fragments they found.

One recent study in the US linked wastewater treatment plants with the release of plastic into the environment. And the scientists think that wastewater is likely to make a large contribution - particularly of microfibres from synthetic clothing and microbeads.

"We welcomed the ban on microbeads in personal care products introduced earlier this year," said Prof Woodward. "And we want to monitor the effect of that ban.

"But microbeads are also used in industrial processes - in the moulding of larger plastic products. So there are likely to be multiple sources.

"In urban environments, microplastics may come from wastewater and sewer systems, from plastic litter that is broken up and fragmented, and even from the air. Sources may not be active all of the time, so they are difficult to track - but we are working on it!" said Dr Hurley.

Flushed by flooding

Image copyrightJAMIE WOODWARD

Image captionEven rural stream beds are contaminated with microplastics

The researchers gathered their first set of samples prior to the winter floods of 2015 and 2016. That extreme flooding was particularly severe in their river system - when weeks of heavy rain wreaked havoc in northern England, Northern Ireland and parts of Wales.

The team returned to the sites to see if the levels of plastic had changed. This revealed that the floods had "flushed out" approximately 70% of the microplastics stored in these riverbeds, equivalent to almost a tonne of plastic, or nearly 50 billion particles. It also eradicated microbead contamination at seven sites.

So the rivers are able to "cleanse themselves", the researchers explained. But, as Prof Woodward pointed out, "all of that will ultimately end up in the ocean".

Dr James Rothwell added that, since many of the particles this study detected were so small, they would simply slip through the filtration nets that are used, as standard, to sift microplastics out of the ocean.

"The implications of that are that we might well be underestimating by several orders of magnitude how much microplastic is in the oceans that has been delivered by rivers - flushed out during flood events," he said.

 

Is this the explanation for Plastic Man U fans?

[Guest]

Over recent years there have been many articles concerning the entry of plastic particles into the food chain through fish and into humans, I thought it was common knowledge.

 

Even today on the BBC there is a story about microplastics being found in all bottles of bottled water :

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-43388870

 

In other news on the BBC this morning I found this article interesting:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43405684

 

We have a thread about the possible Russian poisoning of an ex-double agent and the government are up in arms about it too yet our own government is allowing everyone of it's citizens to be poisoned on a daily basis without too much of a care. When will the government actually charge the car makers for their knowing and careless poisoning of the air? Never, I guess, but will they even force them to bring clean cars to the market at reasonable prices? No, of course not. Big business is in charge of the west not governments.

 

Other ludicrous news stroies this morning. Parents have been fined £24m for truancy and term time holidays.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-43254495

 

Working in Education, I understand that absent students can be an annoyance to the teacher and the system but I find this recent move to not be in the interest of student or teacher (or parents). Personally I believe that a student will learn far more from a week's holiday than they will from spending that week in school. I wish that schools actually took students out "into real life" far more often. The school system is inefficient, class learning is inefficient and the reduction of school visits and trips has had a negative effect on the real learning of students. And what has the £24m been used on? Has the inception of the fines even improved education? Students still miss classes through illness so is the disruption actually reduced?

 

Final story of the morning I found interesting was the Macrobiotic diet sect:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43407696

 

I always thought that veggies were a bit abnormal. 

 

EDIT: sorry thought this was interesting news thread - that's the fault of waking up too early in the morning.

 

Edit2: Couple more stroies I found this morning:

 

Arnie backs my thinking:

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/arnold-schwarzenegger-sue-oil-industry-first-degree-murder

 

Hope for Drew (according to oxlong):

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/remote-town-in-the-dominican-republic-some-girls-turn-into-boys

Edited 15 March 2018 by Guest

[leicsmac]

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43408961

 

Pretty much every word right.

[Vardinio'sCat]

17 hours ago, FIF said:

Over recent years there have been many articles concerning the entry of plastic particles into the food chain through fish and into humans, I thought it was common knowledge.

 

Even today on the BBC there is a story about microplastics being found in all bottles of bottled water :

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-43388870

 

In other news on the BBC this morning I found this article interesting:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43405684

 

We have a thread about the possible Russian poisoning of an ex-double agent and the government are up in arms about it too yet our own government is allowing everyone of it's citizens to be poisoned on a daily basis without too much of a care. When will the government actually charge the car makers for their knowing and careless poisoning of the air? Never, I guess, but will they even force them to bring clean cars to the market at reasonable prices? No, of course not. Big business is in charge of the west not governments.

 

Other ludicrous news stroies this morning. Parents have been fined £24m for truancy and term time holidays.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-43254495

 

Working in Education, I understand that absent students can be an annoyance to the teacher and the system but I find this recent move to not be in the interest of student or teacher (or parents). Personally I believe that a student will learn far more from a week's holiday than they will from spending that week in school. I wish that schools actually took students out "into real life" far more often. The school system is inefficient, class learning is inefficient and the reduction of school visits and trips has had a negative effect on the real learning of students. And what has the £24m been used on? Has the inception of the fines even improved education? Students still miss classes through illness so is the disruption actually reduced?

 

Final story of the morning I found interesting was the Macrobiotic diet sect:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43407696

 

I always thought that veggies were a bit abnormal. 

 

EDIT: sorry thought this was interesting news thread - that's the fault of waking up too early in the morning.

 

Edit2: Couple more stroies I found this morning:

 

Arnie backs my thinking:

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/arnold-schwarzenegger-sue-oil-industry-first-degree-murder

 

Hope for Drew (according to oxlong):

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/remote-town-in-the-dominican-republic-some-girls-turn-into-boys

 

If we find it (plastics) in the water and in the fish, it is in us. We are just waiting for confirmation now.

 

Did you read the article about Krill breaking it down through digestion, not good news at all.

 

[Vardinio'sCat]

 

More good news for offshore wind potential. I'm a big fan of onshore wind myself, which in an unsubsidised situation is pretty much the cheapest form of energy you can have these days, in the UK.

 

 

GE Renewable Energy has unveiled plans to develop the most powerful offshore wind turbine to be called the Haliade-X, delivering 45% more energy than any other offshore turbine currently available.

 

http://www.maritimejournal.com/news101/marine-renewable-energy/another-step-forward-in-the-wind-turbine-arms-race

Edited 16 March 2018 by Vardinio'sCat

[Sly]

I’m not sure why stuff is still provided in plastic packing really. It’s been an issue for years but with the “Blue Planet” phenomenon, it’s really gained traction. 

 

I think it’s fairly nailed on that we’re injesting plastic ourselves. However it’s just a modern world issue, albeit one that needs addressing and rectifying. At least we’re not inhaling passive smoke from coal fires, standing in pubs / clubs or industrial engineering these days.

[leicsmac]

Regarding climate change and the like (as well as other possible events in the future), I've always considered the White Walkers in Game of Thrones a rather apt metaphor for it all: a force of nature, uncaring of any human concern, beyond the power of any own group of people but perhaps not beyond all humans together. Jon sums it up pretty well in the most recent series:

 

"How do I convince people who don't know me that an enemy they don't believe in is coming to kill them all?"

 

As well as Tyrions reply:

 

“People's minds aren't made for problems that large. Whitewalkers, the Night King, Army of the Dead — it's almost a relief to confront a comfortable monster like my sister.”

 

Seems that other folks think similar too:

 

https://www.thrillist.com/entertainment/nation/game-of-thrones-ending-climate-change-global-warming

 

https://nerdist.com/game-of-thrones-climate-change/

[davieG]

Recycling is getting very confusing.

 

I'm in the Oadby & Wigston council area. Currently we have 4 options - paper/cardboard, tins, plastic etc, bottles and general rubbish.

From April we're moving to 2 options all the recyclables and general rubbish.

 

Now I've always understood that if you contaminate the paper and cardboard with food then it can't be recycled or at least makes it very difficult to do so.

 

So how is this supposed to increase the amount of recycling?

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, davieG said:

Recycling is getting very confusing.

 

I'm in the Oadby & Wigston council area. Currently we have 4 options - paper/cardboard, tins, plastic etc, bottles and general rubbish.

From April we're moving to 2 options all the recyclables and general rubbish.

 

Now I've always understood that if you contaminate the paper and cardboard with food then it can't be recycled or at least makes it very difficult to do so.

 

So how is this supposed to increase the amount of recycling?

 

How will it be contaminated with food?

 

As I understand it, it just means that paper/cardboard no longer has to be separated from plastic/metal.

[davieG]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

How will it be contaminated with food?

 

As I understand it, it just means that paper/cardboard no longer has to be separated from plastic/metal.

Because it will be in the same bag as the food containers and it doesn't matter how well you clean the food containers they'll all ways be remnants left.

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, davieG said:

Because it will be in the same bag as the food containers and it doesn't matter how well you clean the food containers they'll all ways be remnants left.

 

Oh, I see.

 

But won't any remaining food contamination be on the inside of the containers?

[davieG]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

Oh, I see.

 

But won't any remaining food contamination be on the inside of the containers?

Not from tins, open plastic packaging, wine/beer bottles. Practically every food container could easily have remnants of food.

I've even heard that they can't recycle most pizza boxes because of the food contamination.

 

Not saying this is all fact but it's what I've heard/read in reports hence my "confusing" comment.

[Buce]

1 minute ago, davieG said:

Not from tins, open plastic packaging, wine/beer bottles. Practically every food container could easily have remnants of food.

I've even heard that they can't recycle most pizza boxes because of the food contamination.

 

Not saying this is all fact but it's what I've heard/read in reports hence my "confusing" comment.

 

It is confusing, you're right.

 

Maybe they intending washing paper recycling in some way?

[Innovindil]

26 minutes ago, davieG said:

Recycling is getting very confusing.

 

I'm in the Oadby & Wigston council area. Currently we have 4 options - paper/cardboard, tins, plastic etc, bottles and general rubbish.

From April we're moving to 2 options all the recyclables and general rubbish.

 

Now I've always understood that if you contaminate the paper and cardboard with food then it can't be recycled or at least makes it very difficult to do so.

 

So how is this supposed to increase the amount of recycling?

I'm on the 2 option rubbish collection. We got a leaflet thing on what to do. It says to throw contaminated cardboard/paper into the general waste. Like if you get a McDonald's, you can throw the outer packaging into recycling and the stuff with food remnants into general waste. 

[Rogstanley]

It's called single stream recycling and I believe the idea is that you wash everything thoroughly. It then goes to a sorting centre where humans and robots separate it all out. Sounds a lot easier than having to separate it all yourself!

[davieG]

5 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

It's called single stream recycling and I believe the idea is that you wash everything thoroughly. It then goes to a sorting centre where humans and robots separate it all out. Sounds a lot easier than having to separate it all yourself!

Washing things thoroughly is not easy, just one example I never wash plastic containers that have had chicken in them as you then risk contaminating your own facilities. Some containers are just impossible to get clean without considerable effort and if you attempt to you then leave contaminated water remnants which will leak onto and paper or cardboard.

[Countryfox]

On 11/03/2018 at 18:35, Vardinio'sCat said:

 

Excellent stuff, sounds like you have read the sixth extinction stuff more closely than me. Sometimes I wish I was young again, other times not.

 

On 11/03/2018 at 22:05, leicsmac said:

Well, such stuff is something of a hobby area of expertise for me (cue chorus of the FT Gen Chat veterans saying "you don't say...")

 

I think I’ve seen you pair wondering around town holding big placards with  “The end of the world is nigh”  above your heads ...    

[yorkie1999]

32 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

It's called single stream recycling and I believe the idea is that you wash everything thoroughly. It then goes to a sorting centre where humans and robots separate it all out. Sounds a lot easier than having to separate it all yourself!

And then it all gets chucked in landfill, but at least we feel good about it.

[Vardinio'sCat]

On 3/16/2018 at 04:12, Sly said:

I’m not sure why stuff is still provided in plastic packing really. It’s been an issue for years but with the “Blue Planet” phenomenon, it’s really gained traction. 

 

I think it’s fairly nailed on that we’re injesting plastic ourselves. However it’s just a modern world issue, albeit one that needs addressing and rectifying. At least we’re not inhaling passive smoke from coal fires, standing in pubs / clubs or industrial engineering these days.

 

Wood burners though, most of my mates have them, dead trendy, and they are not really smokeless fuel people .

 

You're basic point is a good one though, it was worse in the past. Having said that, one thing I did read about plastics (tho I'm no expert) is that all the plastic ever made is still out there, whereas most airbourne pollutants tend to get rained out of the air, at least.

 

Been reading a book called The World Without Us. Kinda scary.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Without_Us

[Buce]

19 minutes ago, Vardinio'sCat said:

 

Wood burners though, most of my mates have them, dead trendy, and they are not really smokeless fuel people .

 

You're basic point is a good one though, it was worse in the past. Having said that, one thing I did read about plastics (tho I'm no expert) is that all the plastic ever made is still out there, whereas most airbourne pollutants tend to get rained out of the air, at least.

 

Been reading a book called The World Without Us. Kinda scary.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Without_Us

4

 

Just my cup of tea, VC. Thanks.

 

I'm going straight on to Amazon to order it.

[Vardinio'sCat]

3 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Just my cup of tea, VC. Thanks.

 

I'm going straight on to Amazon to order it.

 

Should be cheap cos it was 2007, but really great book, no wonder it won awards.

 

I'm just about to pass my copy on, as I do with all the books that impress me. I'm a sucker for brilliant popular science books, and now I have finally caved in and bought some reading glasses, it is full steam ahead.