That's great! I'm so glad that we're back on track with getting rid of single-use plastics here in BC.

I think it is a wonderful effort. But my experience with seeing people litter, and who don't seem to care, makes me sad, because it makes the clean up work just that much more difficult.

Much of the trash in oceans comes from less developed countries. Much (though not all) of the atmosphere damaging pollution (and carbon emissions) from activities like coal burning comes from such places too. The US, a developed country, has/had thousands of Super Fund sites identified decades ago and new ones still being added to the list. Not all have been cleaned up. I even remember when a river in the Midwest, maybe it was in Ohio, caught fire. It was not the only highly polluted river in that area.

There are no innocents in the global pollution/environmental carelessness game. I've heard there's almost too much floating trash in the oceans to reasonably expect cleanup efforts can do much about. Perhaps a better thing to focus time and attention on would be to work to reduce how much garbage globally finds its way into the oceans so that the amount of increase slows down. I'm not optimistic.

Everything that can be done is a step in the right direction. They are taking a step.

You can feel that way if you want to do but this organization's feel good happy dance, picking up a bottle here, a bottle there, and clearing a beach here and there, do nothing significant. They provide little more than the unfortunately apt single drop in a large ocean toward providing a course to solve the problem. Major efforts are needed to keep refuse, especially the plastic kind, out of the oceans to begin with.

Before hitting the "Submit" button, I decided to do a search to see what more I could find out. Interestingly enough, the US government's experts at NOAA are of this very opinion -what's needed is to slow down and stop the flow of debris into the oceans. Here's a quote from a NOAA page, I'll provide a link

"We did some quick calculations that if you tried to clean up less than one percent of the North Pacific Ocean it would take 67 ships one year to clean up that portion. And the bottom line is that until we prevent debris from entering the ocean at the source, it's just going to keep congregating in these areas. We could go out and clean it all up and then still have the same problem on our hands as long as there's debris entering the ocean."

Mid Ocean garbage patch cleanups not feasible and don't fix problems

My gs was in the navy and I asked him where they threw the garbage and he said into the ocean. I thought that was terrible.

Elmer, you have voiced a similar opinion on personal responsibility regarding environmental issues in the past. I don't deny people the opportunity to do their part and feel good about it, however, I feel it is important to recognize that nothing will make a significant impact short of corporate and government change. That is where personal action may be able to make some impact. Pushing governments and corporations to change policy on a larger level is, IMHO, what is needed.

Corporations and governments have willingly supported the idea that we, as an individuals, are responsible for many environmental issues. This lets them off the hook. From what I've read, that is the danger of celebrating and promoting smaller actions like this. It, somewhat ironically, works against significant positive change.

Elmer, I don't have facts and figures and don't argue with your statement about developing countries, but I am curious if the garbage (often identified as recycling when it's not) that is shipped from developed countries to developing countries counts as our waste or theirs?

I feel it is important to recognize that nothing will make a significant impact short of corporate and government change. That is where personal action may be able to make some impact. Pushing governments and corporations to change policy on a larger level is, IMHO, what is needed.

It seems that at the moment, huge change seems to be planned as far as increasing taxes of wealthy individuals/companies to fund better social services for those in poverty.

As important as environmental issues are, I'm wondering just how much of the receipts of new tax $ will be diverted from other newly strengthened social programs such as food stamps and child care to fund enforcement of already existing environmental law.

For some time now, in industrial areas of Texas, just for instance, there are legal limits on chemical dumping, but slender budgets in local oversight/enforcement programs have prevented adequate enforcement.

Texas state workers including oversight/enforcement are often paid a miserable wage, less than similar workers in other states, and often there are simply not enough of them to be effective.

The question is not whether the environment is important, clearly it is essential, it is whether those writing budgets are willing to fully fund enforcement in the face of competing social expenses, and additionally whether such enforcement is going to be ultimately possible/meaningful in coping with the dumping from other nations who may not care.

I learned recently that some people believe claims of plastic polluting our oceans are a hoax. I'm guessing many are the same people who believe Covid is a hoax. We're living in the age of misinformation.

While I applaud their effort, and every bit helps, it is a drop in the ocean so to speak when an estimated 8 million *tons* of plastic are dumped into the ocean each year. I notice they don't say how long it took them to collect the 10 million lbs...if it was years or not.

I do believe it's a drop in the bucket, but what if they inspire 100, or 1,000 similar efforts? What they are doing, in the very least is raising awareness. Programs that appeal to children can start them on a more conscientious lifestyle path. Along with other efforts, like maybe taxing plastics at a very high rate and encouraging the use of other packaging, we can make a difference for future generations. Or we can disparage every effort as not good enough, not big enough, etc and continue on the same path of destruction of the Earth.

olychick, if 100 or 1000 efforts are inspired, then you'd have 1000 drops in an ocean. Futile efforts that don't fix the problem.

I think daisychain and Lucille make good points. Ultimately, I think nothing will be done until there's substantive action- legislation and international treaties -on the part of national and supranational governments.

Lucille, because of varying politics and priorities among states, it's really federal legislation that matters. That's what the EPA enforces. Serious legislation gets adequate funding and progress is made. This is another of those issues that Americans wrongly believe to be a problem we face uniquely that other countries don't. Like so many of the others, that's a false assumption. Take the EU as an example where environmental laws are significantly more stringent than here and are enforced. As for costs, you get what you pay for.

I think it is a wonderful effort. I hope that my mentions of reality do not place me in the Or we can disparage camp. One can applaud the small efforts, and at the same time recognize that much more effort and multiple methods are needed: Along with other efforts.

My teenage daughter has a couple of bracelets from them. While their efforts may not result in the oceans becoming pristine, they do bring a tremendous amount of awareness to a problem that a lot of people might not think much about otherwise.

I saw a tech snippet on tv the other day where they're experimenting using plastics which can't be recycled for street and highway paving. It's in it's test phase but looks promising for long lasting durability compared to regular asphalt or concrete. I guess it beats floating in the oceans and filling up landfills, maybe it will blend in well with the megatons of rubber dust spread along the byways of our lives.

It's true this is a very small amount of plastic in the grand scheme of things, but the fact is plastic is harming the planet (not just the ocean) and any animals who cross paths with it (many animals don't understand that it's not food). It's also affecting humans as well, since we are consuming very small amounts of plastic in our food and water (disgusting but true). I do not want plastic to be a part of my diet, and I don't think anyone else does either.

Then there's the Pacific Garbage Patch:

"Microplastics make up 94 percent of an estimated 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic in the patch. But that only amounts to eight percent of the total tonnage. As it turns out, of the 79,000 metric tons of plastic in the patch, most of it is abandoned fishing gear—not plastic bottles or packaging drawing headlines today.

A comprehensive new study by Slat’s team of scientists, published in Scientific Reports, concluded that the 79,000 tons was four to 16 times larger than has been previously estimated for the patch. The study also found that fishing nets account for 46 percent of the trash, with the majority of the rest composed of other fishing industry gear, including ropes, oyster spacers, eel traps, crates, and baskets. Scientists estimate that 20 percent of the debris is from the 2011 Japanese tsunami."

Source: https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/great-pacific-garbage-patch-isnt-what-you-think/

"Then there's the Pacific Garbage Patch:"

My comment two days ago included a link to a NOAA page on this very topic. The first thing shown in the article is a graphic of the Pacific, locating where the garbage accumulations are.

If that's what's floating around on top, you have to wonder how much junk has sunk to the bottom...