Waste
Plastic

Choking the Oceans With Plastic

Burgess COMMENTARY

Peter Burgess

Choking the Oceans With Plastic Photo Credit Alec Doherty

LOS ANGELES — The world is awash in plastic. It’s in our cars and our carpets, we wrap it around the food we eat and virtually every other product we consume; it has become a key lubricant of globalization — but it’s choking our future in ways that most of us are barely aware.

I have just returned with a team of scientists from six weeks at sea conducting research in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch — one of five major garbage patches drifting in the oceans north and south of the Equator at the latitude of our great terrestrial deserts. Although it was my 10th voyage to the area, I was utterly shocked to see the enormous increase in the quantity of plastic waste since my last trip in 2009. Plastics of every description, from toothbrushes to tires to unidentifiable fragments too numerous to count floated past our marine research vessel Alguita for hundreds of miles without end. We even came upon a floating island bolstered by dozens of plastic buoys used in oyster aquaculture that had solid areas you could walk on.

Plastics are now one of the most common pollutants of ocean waters worldwide. Pushed by winds, tides and currents, plastic particles form with other debris into large swirling glutinous accumulation zones, known to oceanographers as gyres, which comprise as much as 40 percent of the planet’s ocean surface — roughly 25 percent of the entire earth.

No scientist, environmentalist, entrepreneur, national or international government agency has yet been able to establish a comprehensive way of recycling the plastic trash that covers our land and inevitably blows and washes down to the sea. In a 2010 study of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers, my colleagues and I estimated that some 2.3 billion pieces of plastic — from polystyrene foam to tiny fragments and pellets — had flowed from Southern California’s urban centers into its coastal waters in just three days of sampling.

The deleterious consequences of humanity’s “plastic footprint” are many, some known and some yet to be discovered. We know that plastics biodegrade exceptionally slowly, breaking into tiny fragments in a centuries-long process. We know that plastic debris entangles and slowly kills millions of sea creatures; that hundreds of species mistake plastics for their natural food, ingesting toxicants that cause liver and stomach abnormalities in fish and birds, often choking them to death. We know that one of the main bait fish in the ocean, the lantern fish, eats copious quantities of plastic fragments, threatening their future as a nutritious food source to the tuna, salmon, and other pelagic fish we consume, adding to the increasing amount of synthetic chemicals unknown before 1950 that we now carry in our bodies.

We suspect that more animals are killed by vagrant plastic waste than by even climate change — a hypothesis that needs to be seriously tested. During our most recent voyage, we studied the effects of pollution, taking blood and liver samples from fish as we searched for invasive species and plastic-linked pollutants that cause protein and hormone abnormalities. While we hope our studies will yield important contributions to scientific knowledge, they address but a small part of a broader issue.

Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story The reality is that only by preventing synthetic debris — most of which is disposable plastic — from getting into the ocean in the first place will a measurable reduction in the ocean’s plastic load be accomplished. Clean-up schemes are legion, but have never been put into practice in the garbage patches.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the United States supports environmentalist groups that remove debris from beaches. But the sieve-like skimmers they use, no matter how technologically sophisticated, will never be able to clean up remote garbage gyres: There’s too much turbulent ocean dispersing and mixing up the mess.

The problem is compounded by the aquaculture industry, which uses enormous amounts of plastic in its floats, nets, lines and tubes. The most common floats and tubes I’ve found in the deep ocean and on Hawaiian beaches come from huge sea-urchin and oyster farms like the one that created the oyster-buoy island we discovered. Those buoys were torn from their moorings by the tsunami that walloped Japan on March 11, 2011. But no regulatory remedies exist to deal with tons of plastic equipment lost accidentally and in storms. Government and industry organizations purporting to certify sustainably farmed seafood, despite their dozens of pages of standards, fail to mention gear that is lost and floats away. Governments, which are rightly concerned with depletion of marine food sources, should ensure that plastic from cages, buoys and other equipment used for aquaculture does not escape into the waters.

But, in the end, the real challenge is to combat an economic model that thrives on wasteful products and packaging, and leaves the associated problem of clean-up costs. Changing the way we produce and consume plastics is a challenge greater than reining in our production of carbon dioxide.

Plastics are a nightmare to recycle. They are very hard to clean. They can melt at low temperatures, so impurities are not vaporized. It makes no difference whether a synthetic polymer like polyethylene is derived from petroleum or plants; it is still a persistent pollutant. Biodegradable plastics exist, but manufacturers are quick to point out that marine degradable does not mean “marine disposable.”

Scientists in Britain and the Netherlands have proposed to cut plastic pollution by the institution of a “circular economy.” The basic concept is that products must be designed with end-of-life recovery in mind. They propose a precycling premium to provide incentives to eliminate the possibility that a product will become waste.

In the United States, especially in California, the focus has been on so-called structural controls, such as covering gutters and catch basins with screens. This has reduced the amount of debris flowing down rivers to the sea. Activists around the world are lobbying for bans on the most polluting plastics — the bottles, bags and containers that deliver food and drink. Many have been successful. In California, nearly 100 municipalities have passed ordinances banning throwaway plastic bags and the Senate is considering a statewide ban.

Until we shut off the flow of plastic to the sea, the newest global threat to our Anthropocene age will only get worse.

Charles J. Moore is a captain in the U.S. merchant marine and founder of the Algalita Marine Research and Education Institute in Long Beach, California.

A version of this op-ed appears in print on August 26, 2014, on page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: Choking the Oceans With Plastic. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe

SECTIONSHOMESEARCHSKIP TO CONTENTSKIP TO NAVIGATIONVIEW MOBILE VERSION The Opinion Pages|Choking the Oceans With Plastic SHARE SUBSCRIBE NOW LOG IN SETTINGS OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR How the Supreme Court Protects Bad Cops EDITORIAL The Governor’s Primary in New York MAUREEN DOWD He Has a Dream CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER The Drinker’s Manifesto CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER The Expanding World of Poverty Capitalism EDITORIAL No Thaw Yet in Ukraine OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS Declare Yom Kippur a U.N. Holiday ROOM FOR DEBATE What's the True Reach of Celebrity Altruism? OP-TALK How Doctors See the Syrian Civil War Play Video OP-DOCS ‘A Marriage to Remember’ CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER Where Are the Brazilian Introverts? OP-TALK Is NATO a Bulwark in Need of Reform or a Relic? OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR Let the Khmer Rouge Record Show OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR How to Get Kids to Class TAKING NOTE Attack the Donor: From Bloomberg to the Koch Brothers OP-TALK Bashar al-Assad: Frenemy or Foe? OP-TALK Danger! White Girl Twerking LETTERS How Should We Act Against ISIS? LETTERS In New York and Ferguson, a Rush to Judgment LETTER The Long Game in Turkey LETTER Rescheduling Child Care OPINIONATOR | THE STONE What Does It Mean to ‘Throw Like a Girl’? OPINIONATOR | MENAGERIE My Daughter, Her Rat ROOM FOR DEBATE Is Tennis Strung Too Tight? OPINIONATOR | DRAFT On Not Writing NEWS ANALYSIS Dealing With Digital Cruelty Loading... The Opinion Pages | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR Photo

4

M. Matthews Raleigh, NC 17 hours ago Puts the famous line from 'The Graduate' in a whole new perspective, doesn't it?

5

ted new york 17 hours ago Like MRod, who spent his day on a Staten Island beach picking up trash, I do that every year at Jones Beach. While I'm doing it, I always figure that if every person at the beach picked up one piece of plastic, that could be millions of pieces of trash taken care of. But that's not the way it works, alas. Like MRod, all I usually get at the beach is stares for carrying a sodden piece of trash in my suntanned hand when I should be having fun. One of the things I often notice when I'm at Jones Beach is how many deflated balloons are out there being washed ashore. Now, whenever I see partygoers holding dozens of balloons in Central Park or Harlem, and a child entranced by a balloon let loose into the sky, I get a terrible feeling in my stomach because I know exactly where it's going to end up. 5

rickob los angeles 17 hours ago The comedian George Burns once said: 'No snowflake thinks it's responsible for the avalanche.' If you are unaware of your 'single use' consumption and it's packaging - then you're part of the problem and have some homework to do. Good luck to all of us! 7

Scott Elliott Brooklyn, NY 18 hours ago Thank you, Cap'n. Moore, for this passionate and informative article. A couple of years ago, I had the privilege to make a documentary about an expedition to study plastic pollution in the Atlantic Ocean. The film is called 'Into The Gyre' and it follows a group of researchers to the remote Sargasso Sea, which is the location of one of the five 'gyres' that Moore writes about. We spent a month at sea on a 150-foot sailboat doing rigorous scientific collection of oceanic plastic pollution. I've been reading a lot lately about people asking, 'why don't we just scoop up all the plastic?' The sad fact is that it's just not possible and would likely cause more harm than good. While there are buoys and toothbrushes out in the gyres, most of the debris is in the form of tiny pieces of broken down plastic. You can't see most of it unless you scoop it up in a net. And unfortunatley, if you tried to scoop up millions of pounds of plastic in giant nets, you're going to also capture millions of pounds of microscopic ocean life. That could devastate the ocean in worse ways than what the plastic is doing. Much easier and simpler: Use a reusable water bottle. Use less plastic bags. Recycle ALL plastic, not just bottles. You can watch the film here: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/intothegyre www.intothegyre.com 6

coronado9 Mendocino, CA 18 hours ago Where are the photos and please provide coordinates. These garbage patches should be visible from google earth if they are hundreds of miles in length. We need more visual not artwork NYTimes.

Patrick Gerini Cedar Grove, NJ 18 hours ago Let;s start by making better choices in the stores. Select products that are not wrapped in unnecessary layers of plastic or in plastic containers. One of the easiest and simplest choices is soap: do you really need liquid soap for your shower? Wouldn't the same brand's bar soap. wrapped in paper, serve just as well? There are myriads of non-food products that can be purchased either sold in plastic or paper: cat litter, pet food, laundry detergent (does liquid clean better than powder? Probably not.), disposable paper plates vs plastic plates for your next tailgate, etc., etc. Let's use plastic only where is makes sense from a hygienic or food safety perspective. 4

Richard Los Angeles 19 hours ago Yes, the oceans and especially the study area are thick with plastic. No informed person can find fault with Mr. Moore's message. Without a multinational effort to start reducing the existing plastic in the ocean, merely reducing our use of plastic will only go so far and will not remedy the huge ongoing eco disaster that's making it's way into our food chain, which is a mind numbing thought. I reject the popular argument that there's no solution to clean it up, because clean it up we must or look forward to the day when literally all seafood is poisoned and inedible. Yes, it will take an outrageous engineering effort costing billions of dollars, but don't tell me it can't be done. Mr. Moore continues to ring a bell whose peal has sadly become white noise. Who doesn't know at this point that our oceans are filled with deadly, insidious garbage? We need to hear from those in industry, around the world, with a reclamation plan. The United Nations, instead of just being a nice piece of real estate, should get involved, really involved, and direct the effort. Those nations who continue to use the world's oceans as their toilet should be assessed an appropriate penalty to discourage their disgusting practices. Man has obliterated the ozone layer, poisoned the air, poisoned the groundwater and is now poisoning the oceans with plastic particulates ingested by every living creature on earth. It's time to put on the breaks and turn around. Now, what's the plan? 5

Av San Diego 19 hours ago I have made a conscience effort to reduce my use of disposable plastics, but it's more difficult than one might assume. It's virtually impossible to buy food from the grocery store that isn't wrapped in plastic- yes, even produce. How can we encourage manufacturers to stop pre packaging everything? Allow me to pick out my head of lettuce, bunch of grapes, carrots, anything, and put it in a reusable bag. It's a small step but seems like such an obvious one that could have large ramifications. 5

Jeanne K Buffalo, NY 19 hours ago A small step for reducing plastic use: Use bars of soap and avoid all those bottled body washes and soaps especially in our own homes if not in public places. 4

NYT Pick Cindy-L Woodside, CA 19 hours ago I am very irritated with the laws banning plastics bags to take groceries home: The weight of the plastic bags given by retailers was usually less than 5% of the weight of the plastics used in packaging the groceries purchased. I have noticed that the reusable bags shopper bring to stores are usually made of plastic and far heavier than the bags distributed by the merchant. I wonder how many times a shopper use these bags before discarding them. They also contribute to plastic waste. Do they contribute more to the waste than the light weight plastic bags they replace? These laws seem to be contra productive. They likely increase the amount of plastic waste and cause great inconvenience. 3

H.G. N.J. 17 hours ago It's not just a matter of weight. A single plastic bag that gets away can choke a bird or a sea turtle. I've used canvas bags for close to 15 years for all of my shopping. I toss them in the washer every other week or so. I still have my original bags; I've never had to throw one away. Your assumption that people are buying reusable bags and throwing them away after one or two uses is false. These days, anyone accepting a plastic bag at a store is revealing their own ignorance and/or irresponsibility. 3

Cindy-L Woodside, CA 17 hours ago But the plastic wrappings in which many items are packaged can also choke a bird or a sea turtle. I find it amazing that any item can be in use for 15 years. You must no shop very frequently. 1

SEE ALL REPLIES PitchNPutt Palo Alto 20 hours ago Unfortunately, yesterday the California Assembly failed to pass SB-270 which would ban single-use carryout plastic bags throughout the state. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml;jsessionid=3... 1

fm NY 20 hours ago This article would have been well served if a few pictures of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch were included. Yes it can be Googled but some of the more prominent results in Google Images are about how the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a lie. 5

Brunella Brooklyn 20 hours ago The cosmetics/personal care industry also bears responsibility for introducing products containing plastic 'micro-beads,' which end up polluting waterways and in the food chain, after being ingested by birds and fish (a huge concern in the Great Lakes, adding to industrial toxins/run-off already there). These companies should bear the costs of clean-up, just as oil companies must after a spill — and not simply pledge to 'phase out' such hazardous products over a few years time, which is far too lenient. Consumers should avoid these products at all costs. 11

Brian McClay Montreal 20 hours ago Obviously a difficult problem to solve without banning the material altogether and that’s just the plastic waste we can see. Micro-plastic waste in our oceans is perhaps a more insidious threat. Dr. Mark Anthony Brown, who worked with Plymouth University on a project looking at this problem, published in Current Biology, Volume 23, Issue 23 states: “Our research has identified small plastic fibres as comprising >85 per cent of the solid waste pollution in our marine environment, and there is an overwhelming correlation between these fibres and textiles.” Browne and his colleagues who founded an organisation, Benign by Design, used forensic analytical techniques to reveal that the types of fibres in aquatic waste matched polyester fibres used in the clothing industry. Earlier research by the group showed polyester garments could release up to 1,900 tiny fibres per item every time they are washed. 6

s. berger new york 20 hours ago Nobody alive now will get to see the extinction of the human species as result of the cumulative laws of unintended consequences. The accumulation of unrecoverable plastic refuse in the oceans is just one of these intended consequences. There are so many others that it is impossible to list them all, plus the unknown interactions between them, which compounds their lethality. It will not stop regardless of all the laws passed because Corporate People do not suffer at all and flesh & blood people are so immersed in the lifestyle that corporations provide, that, like fish, we are not aware of the medium in which we live. Much like Morlochs, who were people of a sort, we Eloi are just foodstuffs to be exploited. As for the oceans' pollution, out of sight, out of mind. 9

NYT Pick Aspirant Dominican Republic 20 hours ago I have lived in all too many countries where the river is a dump for everything from human waste to plastic bottles. If you put it in the river, do not be surprised when you find it in the ocean. Then again I come from a country where there are regulations to control that sort of dumping. Regulations which many would overturn in the name of lowering the cost of doing business. 10

Paul Illinois 21 hours ago Well, maybe -- it intuitively makes sense that the oceans might be awash in plastic by now. But it's worth noticing that this op-ed piece is informed by no systematic field measurement of how much plastic the oceans actually do contain. None. There has so far been exactly one global and systematic sampling of the oceans for plastic, it was conducted in 2010 and 2011. That survey, to the great surprise of the scientists conducting it, found orders of magnitude _less_ actual plastic out there than has been assumed/predicted/guessed at by writers such as this one. Literally like 1 percent as much. The journal article was just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences; the researchers are from Spain and Chile. Now this survey is just a first step, it doesn't answer the 'why'. It may turn out that the other 99 percent of the 'missing' plastic has broken down into microbeads and been consumed by fish; could turn out that there is simply far less plastic washing into the oceans overall than was previously thought; could be some combination of those answers, or a whole new answer not yet imagined. Researchers are now pursuing the issue and at some point we'll see. But the key point for right now is: the only real science yet performed on the question of how much plastic is floating in our oceans has found much, much less of it than folks like this writer have been assuming. 4

H.G. N.J. 19 hours ago You greatly misrepresent the findings of the paper, which is available here: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/06/25/1314705111.full.pdf+html Contrary to what you suggest, the authors 'confirm the gathering of floating plastic debris, mainly microplastics, in all subtropical gyres.' They estimate between 7,000 and 35,000 tons of plastic on the surface of the oceans. They point out that this is orders of magnitude less than the million tons that would be expected based on estimates from the 1970s. They do not suggest, as you do, that this 'discrepancy' is a reason for complacency. Instead, they point out that there may be fragmentation processes that make the plastic particles too small to be measured by the 200-micron mesh they used. The paper reiterates that plastics are ingested by a wide range of ocean organisms, and that contaminants are accumulating in those organisms. Contrary to what you say, there is no suggestion that fish eating plastic fragments makes the problem go away, nor that less plastic is washing into the oceans than was believed. Reading the paper, one senses a sense of concern and urgency about the need to understand what is happening to the plastic in the oceans. I'm sure the authors would be dismayed to find out that people are quoting their results in an effort to argue that the problem of plastic accumulating in the oceans is not something we should worry about. 8

Paul Illinois 18 hours ago 'They point out that this is orders of magnitude less than the million tons that would be expected based on estimates from the 1970s.' Which is simply a re-statement of what I wrote here. 'they point out that there may be fragmentation processes that make the plastic particles too small to be measured by the 200-micron mesh they used.' Also a re-statement of what I wrote here; so far we are in complete agreement. 'Contrary to what you say, there is no suggestion that fish eating plastic fragments makes the problem go away.' You seem to have my comment mixed up with someone else's; I neither stated nor implied that fish eating plastic fragments makes any problem go away. 'I'm sure the authors would be dismayed to find out that people are quoting their results in an effort to argue that the problem of plastic accumulating in the oceans is not something we should worry about.' No doubt they would be, and if someone here offers such an argument I'll have the same reaction. In the meantime though there is really no good purpose served by putting straw men into the mouths of others. 1

SEE ALL REPLIES straightshooter California 21 hours ago To bad, we are the only species that Fouls it's own nest. I hope Mother Nature is working on a tougher airborne Ebola that will eliminate the real waste from the planet and the oceans. Perhaps then the place will return to being a true Paradise. 3

John Dana Point, CA 21 hours ago To observe American capitalism at its worst, travel to Lima, Peru and see how a population of more than ten million exclusively drinks water out of plastic bottles served up by American corporations like Coca Cola through its subsidiaries in South America. I kept asking myself, 'Why isn't Peru investing in building water treatment plants that serve up drinkable water?', but I suspect beverage industry lobbyists have a lot to do with the answer. 10

Michael F Yonkers, NY 20 hours ago Or maybe, just like us, they prefer the taste of coke.

JG Denver, CO 21 hours ago The vast majority of items we buy do not need plastic wrapping. There is so much of it, that perhaps we should start to ask the cashier to remove it before we take our items home. In may force the shops to request the manufacturers to discontinue its use for most of their products. It is so strong, it is literally impossible to tear without a tool, a process that leads cuts or injury. It has no purpose but to create mountains of unnecessary garbage. Some of the packaging is probably more expensive than the item itself. I find excessive packaging offensive, a tremendous waste of money and a waste of time opening it up and disposing of it, let alone the disastrous environmental and health impact it has on all leaving creatures on the planet. As customers we should have the option to buy items without any packaging. The campaign should read 'save money by no frill, no packaging'. 6

Sivaram Pochiraju Hyderabad, India 21 hours ago Very good article and well supported by some wonderful and practically useful comments. All that I want to say is that, it's high time all out efforts are made to make each and every person aware of this mega problem and also find ways and means not only in reducing the utilisation of plastic to the extent possible and also see that plastic is not thrown away in lakes, ponds, rivers and seas just like that whether it's industrial or individual or combined disposal of plastic material in view of huge damage done to fishes, animals and human beings. 2

mhoney42 fresno. ca. 21 hours ago The legacy of unrestrained capitalism. I personally do not see any way we will recover from our destruction of the environment - capitalism is not allowing us to act in the public good. Our children will never see elephants in the wild, tigers, coral reefs that are healthy, and on and on and on. Whales - oh, thank you Obama for opening up the entire east coast to seismic tests for oil. More whale and dolphin deaths coming right up. Every time I read a lovely story of some poor animal getting freed from a net, I think of how many are missed, and just die. Thanks, Jamie Dimon, Warren Buffett, everyone who won't collect taxes from corporations or hold them accountable. I see no solution in sight. 6

Matt Whiton Boston 21 hours ago This project to clean up the gyres seems particularly hopeful http://www.theoceancleanup.com/ It remains the case that we have to shut off the source. 1

H.G. N.J. 21 hours ago The clean-up project is a pipe dream. There are many problems with the idea. See: http://deepseanews.com/2014/07/the-ocean-cleanup-part-2-technical-review... The real solution, which is much less flashy, is two-fold: reduce your use of plastics, and organize and/or participate in beach or stream cleanups in your neighborhood. As this article: http://inhabitat.com/the-fallacy-of-cleaning-the-gyres-of-plastic-with-a... explains (under the heading, 'The good news'), beach cleanup is gyre cleanup. The plastic doesn't stay in the gyres forever. If we stop adding to the garbage patches and remove what washes up on our shores, we will be able to solve this problem. 1

GLC USA 22 hours ago Are we approaching an era of competing end-of-days scenarios? Climate change is going to destroy our planet, we are told. Capt. Moore tells us that plastic is worse that climate change. What's next? At least the nuclear waste storage debacle is being solved by greater perils. 1

READ MORE 432 COMMENTS Readers shared their thoughts on this article.The comments section is closed. To send a letter to the editor, write to letters@nytimes.com. All 432 Readers’ Picks 242 NYT Picks 15 Newest More on nytimes.com More in OpinionGo to the Opinion Section » OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR How the Supreme Court Protects Bad Cops EDITORIAL The Governor’s Primary in New York The Times will not make an endorsement in the Democratic primary for governor because Andrew Cuomo failed to keep... MAUREEN DOWD He Has a Dream President Obama, who once boldly and candidly addressed race, has outsourced the issue to the Rev. Al Sharpton. Top NewsGo to the Home Page » Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty U.S. Mobilizes Allies to Widen Assault on ISIS American Fighting for ISIS Is Killed in Syria SITE INDEX NEWS World U.S. Politics New York Business Technology Science Health Sports Education Obituaries Today's Paper Corrections OPINION Today's Opinion Op-Ed Columnists Editorials Contributing Writers Op-Ed Contributors Opinionator Letters Sunday Review Taking Note Room for Debate Public Editor Video: Opinion ARTS Today's Arts Art & Design ArtsBeat Books Dance Movies Music N.Y.C. Events Guide Television Theater Video Games Video: Arts LIVING Automobiles Crosswords Dining & Wine Education Fashion & Style Health Home & Garden Jobs Magazine N.Y.C. Events Guide Real Estate T Magazine Travel Weddings & Celebrations LISTINGS & MORE Classifieds Tools & Services Times Topics Public Editor N.Y.C. Events Guide TV Listings Blogs Cartoons Multimedia Photography Video NYT Store Times Journeys Subscribe Manage My Account SUBSCRIBE Times Premier Home Delivery Digital Subscriptions NYT Now NYT Opinion Email Newsletters Alerts Crosswords Gift Subscriptions Corporate Subscriptions Education Rate Mobile Applications Replica Edition International New York Times © 2014 The New York Times Company HomeSearchContact UsWork With UsAdvertiseYour Ad ChoicesPrivacyTerms of ServiceTerms of Sale Site MapHelpSite FeedbackSubscriptions SECTIONSHOMESEARCHSKIP TO CONTENTSKIP TO NAVIGATIONVIEW MOBILE VERSION The Opinion Pages|Choking the Oceans With Plastic SHARE SUBSCRIBE NOW LOG IN SETTINGS OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR How the Supreme Court Protects Bad Cops EDITORIAL The Governor’s Primary in New York MAUREEN DOWD He Has a Dream CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER The Drinker’s Manifesto CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER The Expanding World of Poverty Capitalism EDITORIAL No Thaw Yet in Ukraine OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS Declare Yom Kippur a U.N. Holiday ROOM FOR DEBATE What's the True Reach of Celebrity Altruism? OP-TALK How Doctors See the Syrian Civil War Play Video OP-DOCS ‘A Marriage to Remember’ CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER Where Are the Brazilian Introverts? OP-TALK Is NATO a Bulwark in Need of Reform or a Relic? OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR Let the Khmer Rouge Record Show OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR How to Get Kids to Class TAKING NOTE Attack the Donor: From Bloomberg to the Koch Brothers OP-TALK Bashar al-Assad: Frenemy or Foe? OP-TALK Danger! White Girl Twerking LETTERS How Should We Act Against ISIS? LETTERS In New York and Ferguson, a Rush to Judgment LETTER The Long Game in Turkey LETTER Rescheduling Child Care OPINIONATOR | THE STONE What Does It Mean to ‘Throw Like a Girl’? OPINIONATOR | MENAGERIE My Daughter, Her Rat ROOM FOR DEBATE Is Tennis Strung Too Tight? OPINIONATOR | DRAFT On Not Writing NEWS ANALYSIS Dealing With Digital Cruelty Loading... The Opinion Pages | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR Choking the Oceans With Plastic By CHARLES J. MOOREAUG. 25, 2014 Photo Credit Alec Doherty LOS ANGELES — The world is awash in plastic. It’s in our cars and our carpets, we wrap it around the food we eat and virtually every other product we consume; it has become a key lubricant of globalization — but it’s choking our future in ways that most of us are barely aware. I have just returned with a team of scientists from six weeks at sea conducting research in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch — one of five major garbage patches drifting in the oceans north and south of the Equator at the latitude of our great terrestrial deserts. Although it was my 10th voyage to the area, I was utterly shocked to see the enormous increase in the quantity of plastic waste since my last trip in 2009. Plastics of every description, from toothbrushes to tires to unidentifiable fragments too numerous to count floated past our marine research vessel Alguita for hundreds of miles without end. We even came upon a floating island bolstered by dozens of plastic buoys used in oyster aquaculture that had solid areas you could walk on. Plastics are now one of the most common pollutants of ocean waters worldwide. Pushed by winds, tides and currents, plastic particles form with other debris into large swirling glutinous accumulation zones, known to oceanographers as gyres, which comprise as much as 40 percent of the planet’s ocean surface — roughly 25 percent of the entire earth. No scientist, environmentalist, entrepreneur, national or international government agency has yet been able to establish a comprehensive way of recycling the plastic trash that covers our land and inevitably blows and washes down to the sea. In a 2010 study of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers, my colleagues and I estimated that some 2.3 billion pieces of plastic — from polystyrene foam to tiny fragments and pellets — had flowed from Southern California’s urban centers into its coastal waters in just three days of sampling. The deleterious consequences of humanity’s “plastic footprint” are many, some known and some yet to be discovered. We know that plastics biodegrade exceptionally slowly, breaking into tiny fragments in a centuries-long process. We know that plastic debris entangles and slowly kills millions of sea creatures; that hundreds of species mistake plastics for their natural food, ingesting toxicants that cause liver and stomach abnormalities in fish and birds, often choking them to death. We know that one of the main bait fish in the ocean, the lantern fish, eats copious quantities of plastic fragments, threatening their future as a nutritious food source to the tuna, salmon, and other pelagic fish we consume, adding to the increasing amount of synthetic chemicals unknown before 1950 that we now carry in our bodies. We suspect that more animals are killed by vagrant plastic waste than by even climate change — a hypothesis that needs to be seriously tested. During our most recent voyage, we studied the effects of pollution, taking blood and liver samples from fish as we searched for invasive species and plastic-linked pollutants that cause protein and hormone abnormalities. While we hope our studies will yield important contributions to scientific knowledge, they address but a small part of a broader issue. The reality is that only by preventing synthetic debris — most of which is disposable plastic — from getting into the ocean in the first place will a measurable reduction in the ocean’s plastic load be accomplished. Clean-up schemes are legion, but have never been put into practice in the garbage patches. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the United States supports environmentalist groups that remove debris from beaches. But the sieve-like skimmers they use, no matter how technologically sophisticated, will never be able to clean up remote garbage gyres: There’s too much turbulent ocean dispersing and mixing up the mess. The problem is compounded by the aquaculture industry, which uses enormous amounts of plastic in its floats, nets, lines and tubes. The most common floats and tubes I’ve found in the deep ocean and on Hawaiian beaches come from huge sea-urchin and oyster farms like the one that created the oyster-buoy island we discovered. Those buoys were torn from their moorings by the tsunami that walloped Japan on March 11, 2011. But no regulatory remedies exist to deal with tons of plastic equipment lost accidentally and in storms. Government and industry organizations purporting to certify sustainably farmed seafood, despite their dozens of pages of standards, fail to mention gear that is lost and floats away. Governments, which are rightly concerned with depletion of marine food sources, should ensure that plastic from cages, buoys and other equipment used for aquaculture does not escape into the waters. But, in the end, the real challenge is to combat an economic model that thrives on wasteful products and packaging, and leaves the associated problem of clean-up costs. Changing the way we produce and consume plastics is a challenge greater than reining in our production of carbon dioxide. Plastics are a nightmare to recycle. They are very hard to clean. They can melt at low temperatures, so impurities are not vaporized. It makes no difference whether a synthetic polymer like polyethylene is derived from petroleum or plants; it is still a persistent pollutant. Biodegradable plastics exist, but manufacturers are quick to point out that marine degradable does not mean “marine disposable.” Scientists in Britain and the Netherlands have proposed to cut plastic pollution by the institution of a “circular economy.” The basic concept is that products must be designed with end-of-life recovery in mind. They propose a precycling premium to provide incentives to eliminate the possibility that a product will become waste. In the United States, especially in California, the focus has been on so-called structural controls, such as covering gutters and catch basins with screens. This has reduced the amount of debris flowing down rivers to the sea. Activists around the world are lobbying for bans on the most polluting plastics — the bottles, bags and containers that deliver food and drink. Many have been successful. In California, nearly 100 municipalities have passed ordinances banning throwaway plastic bags and the Senate is considering a statewide ban. Until we shut off the flow of plastic to the sea, the newest global threat to our Anthropocene age will only get worse. Charles J. Moore is a captain in the U.S. merchant marine and founder of the Algalita Marine Research and Education Institute in Long Beach, California. A version of this op-ed appears in print on August 26, 2014, on page A23 of the New York edition with the headline: Choking the Oceans With Plastic. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe NEXT IN OPINION How the Supreme Court Protects Bad Cops CLOSE THIS PANEL John H is a trusted commenter Atlanta 17 hours ago WALL-E. 4

M. Matthews Raleigh, NC 17 hours ago Puts the famous line from 'The Graduate' in a whole new perspective, doesn't it? 5

ted new york 17 hours ago Like MRod, who spent his day on a Staten Island beach picking up trash, I do that every year at Jones Beach. While I'm doing it, I always figure that if every person at the beach picked up one piece of plastic, that could be millions of pieces of trash taken care of. But that's not the way it works, alas. Like MRod, all I usually get at the beach is stares for carrying a sodden piece of trash in my suntanned hand when I should be having fun. One of the things I often notice when I'm at Jones Beach is how many deflated balloons are out there being washed ashore. Now, whenever I see partygoers holding dozens of balloons in Central Park or Harlem, and a child entranced by a balloon let loose into the sky, I get a terrible feeling in my stomach because I know exactly where it's going to end up. 5

rickob los angeles 17 hours ago The comedian George Burns once said: 'No snowflake thinks it's responsible for the avalanche.' If you are unaware of your 'single use'consumption and it's packaging - then you're part of the problem and have some homework to do. Good luck to all of us! 7

Scott Elliott Brooklyn, NY 18 hours ago Thank you, Cap'n. Moore, for this passionate and informative article. A couple of years ago, I had the privilege to make a documentary about an expedition to study plastic pollution in the Atlantic Ocean. The film is called 'Into The Gyre' and it follows a group of researchers to the remote Sargasso Sea, which is the location of one of the five 'gyres' that Moore writes about. We spent a month at sea on a 150-foot sailboat doing rigorous scientific collection of oceanic plastic pollution. I've been reading a lot lately about people asking, 'why don't we just scoop up all the plastic?' The sad fact is that it's just not possible and would likely cause more harm than good. While there are buoys and toothbrushes out in the gyres, most of the debris is in the form of tiny pieces of broken down plastic. You can't see most of it unless you scoop it up in a net. And unfortunatley, if you tried to scoop up millions of pounds of plastic in giant nets, you're going to also capture millions of pounds of microscopic ocean life. That could devastate the ocean in worse ways than what the plastic is doing. Much easier and simpler: Use a reusable water bottle. Use less plastic bags. Recycle ALL plastic, not just bottles. You can watch the film here: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/intothegyre www.intothegyre.com 6

coronado9 Mendocino, CA 18 hours ago Where are the photos and please provide coordinates. These garbage patches should be visible from google earth if they are hundreds of miles in length. We need more visual not artwork NYTimes.

Patrick Gerini Cedar Grove, NJ 18 hours ago Let;s start by making better choices in the stores. Select products that are not wrapped in unnecessary layers of plastic or in plastic containers. One of the easiest and simplest choices is soap: do you really need liquid soap for your shower? Wouldn't the same brand's bar soap. wrapped in paper, serve just as well? There are myriads of non-food products that can be purchased either sold in plastic or paper: cat litter, pet food, laundry detergent (does liquid clean better than powder? Probably not.), disposable paper plates vs plastic plates for your next tailgate, etc., etc. Let's use plastic only where is makes sense from a hygienic or food safety perspective. 4

Richard Los Angeles 19 hours ago Yes, the oceans and especially the study area are thick with plastic. No informed person can find fault with Mr. Moore's message. Without a multinational effort to start reducing the existing plastic in the ocean, merely reducing our use of plastic will only go so far and will not remedy the huge ongoing eco disaster that's making it's way into our food chain, which is a mind numbing thought. I reject the popular argument that there's no solution to clean it up, because clean it up we must or look forward to the day when literally all seafood is poisoned and inedible. Yes, it will take an outrageous engineering effort costing billions of dollars, but don't tell me it can't be done. Mr. Moore continues to ring a bell whose peal has sadly become white noise. Who doesn't know at this point that our oceans are filled with deadly, insidious garbage? We need to hear from those in industry, around the world, with a reclamation plan. The United Nations, instead of just being a nice piece of real estate, should get involved, really involved, and direct the effort. Those nations who continue to use the world's oceans as their toilet should be assessed an appropriate penalty to discourage their disgusting practices. Man has obliterated the ozone layer, poisoned the air, poisoned the groundwater and is now poisoning the oceans with plastic particulates ingested by every living creature on earth. It's time to put on the breaks and turn around. Now, what's the plan? 5

Av San Diego 19 hours ago I have made a conscience effort to reduce my use of disposable plastics, but it's more difficult than one might assume. It's virtually impossible to buy food from the grocery store that isn't wrapped in plastic- yes, even produce. How can we encourage manufacturers to stop pre packaging everything? Allow me to pick out my head of lettuce, bunch of grapes, carrots, anything, and put it in a reusable bag. It's a small step but seems like such an obvious one that could have large ramifications. 5

Jeanne K Buffalo, NY 19 hours ago A small step for reducing plastic use: Use bars of soap and avoid all those bottled body washes and soaps especially in our own homes if not in public places. 4

NYT Pick Cindy-L Woodside, CA 19 hours ago I am very irritated with the laws banning plastics bags to take groceries home: The weight of the plastic bags given by retailers was usually less than 5% of the weight of the plastics used in packaging the groceries purchased. I have noticed that the reusable bags shopper bring to stores are usually made of plastic and far heavier than the bags distributed by the merchant. I wonder how many times a shopper use these bags before discarding them. They also contribute to plastic waste. Do they contribute more to the waste than the light weight plastic bags they replace? These laws seem to be contra productive. They likely increase the amount of plastic waste and cause great inconvenience. 3

H.G. N.J. 17 hours ago It's not just a matter of weight. A single plastic bag that gets away can choke a bird or a sea turtle. I've used canvas bags for close to 15 years for all of my shopping. I toss them in the washer every other week or so. I still have my original bags; I've never had to throw one away. Your assumption that people are buying reusable bags and throwing them away after one or two uses is false. These days, anyone accepting a plastic bag at a store is revealing their own ignorance and/or irresponsibility. 3

Cindy-L Woodside, CA 17 hours ago But the plastic wrappings in which many items are packaged can also choke a bird or a sea turtle. I find it amazing that any item can be in use for 15 years. You must no shop very frequently. 1

SEE ALL REPLIES PitchNPutt Palo Alto 20 hours ago Unfortunately, yesterday the California Assembly failed to pass SB-270 which would ban single-use carryout plastic bags throughout the state. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml;jsessionid=3... 1

fm NY 20 hours ago This article would have been well served if a few pictures of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch were included. Yes it can be Googled but some of the more prominent results in Google Images are about how the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a lie. 5

Brunella Brooklyn 20 hours ago The cosmetics/personal care industry also bears responsibility for introducing products containing plastic 'micro-beads,' which end up polluting waterways and in the food chain, after being ingested by birds and fish (a huge concern in the Great Lakes, adding to industrial toxins/run-off already there). These companies should bear the costs of clean-up, just as oil companies must after a spill — and not simply pledge to 'phase out' such hazardous products over a few years time, which is far too lenient. Consumers should avoid these products at all costs. 11

Brian McClay Montreal 20 hours ago Obviously a difficult problem to solve without banning the material altogether and that’s just the plastic waste we can see. Micro-plastic waste in our oceans is perhaps a more insidious threat. Dr. Mark Anthony Brown, who worked with Plymouth University on a project looking at this problem, published in Current Biology, Volume 23, Issue 23 states: “Our research has identified small plastic fibres as comprising >85 per cent of the solid waste pollution in our marine environment, and there is an overwhelming correlation between these fibres and textiles.” Browne and his colleagues who founded an organisation, Benign by Design, used forensic analytical techniques to reveal that the types of fibres in aquatic waste matched polyester fibres used in the clothing industry. Earlier research by the group showed polyester garments could release up to 1,900 tiny fibres per item every time they are washed. 6

s. berger new york 20 hours ago Nobody alive now will get to see the extinction of the human species as result of the cumulative laws of unintended consequences. The accumulation of unrecoverable plastic refuse in the oceans is just one of these intended consequences. There are so many others that it is impossible to list them all, plus the unknown interactions between them, which compounds their lethality. It will not stop regardless of all the laws passed because Corporate People do not suffer at all and flesh & blood people are so immersed in the lifestyle that corporations provide, that, like fish, we are not aware of the medium in which we live. Much like Morlochs, who were people of a sort, we Eloi are just foodstuffs to be exploited. As for the oceans' pollution, out of sight, out of mind. 9

NYT Pick Aspirant Dominican Republic 20 hours ago I have lived in all too many countries where the river is a dump for everything from human waste to plastic bottles. If you put it in the river, do not be surprised when you find it in the ocean. Then again I come from a country where there are regulations to control that sort of dumping. Regulations which many would overturn in the name of lowering the cost of doing business. 10

Paul Illinois 21 hours ago Well, maybe -- it intuitively makes sense that the oceans might be awash in plastic by now. But it's worth noticing that this op-ed piece is informed by no systematic field measurement of how much plastic the oceans actually do contain. None. There has so far been exactly one global and systematic sampling of the oceans for plastic, it was conducted in 2010 and 2011. That survey, to the great surprise of the scientists conducting it, found orders of magnitude _less_ actual plastic out there than has been assumed/predicted/guessed at by writers such as this one. Literally like 1 percent as much. The journal article was just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences; the researchers are from Spain and Chile. Now this survey is just a first step, it doesn't answer the 'why'. It may turn out that the other 99 percent of the 'missing' plastic has broken down into microbeads and been consumed by fish; could turn out that there is simply far less plastic washing into the oceans overall than was previously thought; could be some combination of those answers, or a whole new answer not yet imagined. Researchers are now pursuing the issue and at some point we'll see. But the key point for right now is: the only real science yet performed on the question of how much plastic is floating in our oceans has found much, much less of it than folks like this writer have been assuming. 4

H.G. N.J. 19 hours ago You greatly misrepresent the findings of the paper, which is available here: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/06/25/1314705111.full.pdf+html Contrary to what you suggest, the authors 'confirm the gathering of floating plastic debris, mainly microplastics, in all subtropical gyres.' They estimate between 7,000 and 35,000 tons of plastic on the surface of the oceans. They point out that this is orders of magnitude less than the million tons that would be expected based on estimates from the 1970s. They do not suggest, as you do, that this 'discrepancy' is a reason for complacency. Instead, they point out that there may be fragmentation processes that make the plastic particles too small to be measured by the 200-micron mesh they used. The paper reiterates that plastics are ingested by a wide range of ocean organisms, and that contaminants are accumulating in those organisms. Contrary to what you say, there is no suggestion that fish eating plastic fragments makes the problem go away, nor that less plastic is washing into the oceans than was believed. Reading the paper, one senses a sense of concern and urgency about the need to understand what is happening to the plastic in the oceans. I'm sure the authors would be dismayed to find out that people are quoting their results in an effort to argue that the problem of plastic accumulating in the oceans is not something we should worry about. 8

Paul Illinois 18 hours ago 'They point out that this is orders of magnitude less than the million tons that would be expected based on estimates from the 1970s.' Which is simply a re-statement of what I wrote here. 'they point out that there may be fragmentation processes that make the plastic particles too small to be measured by the 200-micron mesh they used.' Also a re-statement of what I wrote here; so far we are in complete agreement. 'Contrary to what you say, there is no suggestion that fish eating plastic fragments makes the problem go away.' You seem to have my comment mixed up with someone else's; I neither stated nor implied that fish eating plastic fragments makes any problem go away. 'I'm sure the authors would be dismayed to find out that people are quoting their results in an effort to argue that the problem of plastic accumulating in the oceans is not something we should worry about.' No doubt they would be, and if someone here offers such an argument I'll have the same reaction. In the meantime though there is really no good purpose served by putting straw men into the mouths of others. 1

SEE ALL REPLIES straightshooter California 21 hours ago To bad, we are the only species that Fouls it's own nest. I hope Mother Nature is working on a tougher airborne Ebola that will eliminate the real waste from the planet and the oceans. Perhaps then the place will return to being a true Paradise. 3

John Dana Point, CA 21 hours ago To observe American capitalism at its worst, travel to Lima, Peru and see how a population of more than ten million exclusively drinks water out of plastic bottles served up by American corporations like Coca Cola through its subsidiaries in South America. I kept asking myself, 'Why isn't Peru investing in building water treatment plants that serve up drinkable water?', but I suspect beverage industry lobbyists have a lot to do with the answer. 10

Michael F Yonkers, NY 20 hours ago Or maybe, just like us, they prefer the taste of coke.

JG Denver, CO 21 hours ago The vast majority of items we buy do not need plastic wrapping. There is so much of it, that perhaps we should start to ask the cashier to remove it before we take our items home. In may force the shops to request the manufacturers to discontinue its use for most of their products. It is so strong, it is literally impossible to tear without a tool, a process that leads cuts or injury. It has no purpose but to create mountains of unnecessary garbage. Some of the packaging is probably more expensive than the item itself. I find excessive packaging offensive, a tremendous waste of money and a waste of time opening it up and disposing of it, let alone the disastrous environmental and health impact it has on all leaving creatures on the planet. As customers we should have the option to buy items without any packaging. The campaign should read 'save money by no frill, no packaging'. 6

Sivaram Pochiraju Hyderabad, India 21 hours ago Very good article and well supported by some wonderful and practically useful comments. All that I want to say is that, it's high time all out efforts are made to make each and every person aware of this mega problem and also find ways and means not only in reducing the utilisation of plastic to the extent possible and also see that plastic is not thrown away in lakes, ponds, rivers and seas just like that whether it's industrial or individual or combined disposal of plastic material in view of huge damage done to fishes, animals and human beings. 2

mhoney42 fresno. ca. 21 hours ago The legacy of unrestrained capitalism. I personally do not see any way we will recover from our destruction of the environment - capitalism is not allowing us to act in the public good. Our children will never see elephants in the wild, tigers, coral reefs that are healthy, and on and on and on. Whales - oh, thank you Obama for opening up the entire east coast to seismic tests for oil. More whale and dolphin deaths coming right up. Every time I read a lovely story of some poor animal getting freed from a net, I think of how many are missed, and just die. Thanks, Jamie Dimon, Warren Buffett, everyone who won't collect taxes from corporations or hold them accountable. I see no solution in sight. 6

Matt Whiton Boston 21 hours ago This project to clean up the gyres seems particularly hopeful http://www.theoceancleanup.com/ It remains the case that we have to shut off the source. 1

H.G. N.J. 21 hours ago The clean-up project is a pipe dream. There are many problems with the idea. See: http://deepseanews.com/2014/07/the-ocean-cleanup-part-2-technical-review... The real solution, which is much less flashy, is two-fold: reduce your use of plastics, and organize and/or participate in beach or stream cleanups in your neighborhood. As this article: http://inhabitat.com/the-fallacy-of-cleaning-the-gyres-of-plastic-with-a... explains (under the heading, 'The good news'), beach cleanup is gyre cleanup. The plastic doesn't stay in the gyres forever. If we stop adding to the garbage patches and remove what washes up on our shores, we will be able to solve this problem. 1

GLC USA 22 hours ago Are we approaching an era of competing end-of-days scenarios? Climate change is going to destroy our planet, we are told. Capt. Moore tells us that plastic is worse that climate change. What's next? At least the nuclear waste storage debacle is being solved by greater perils. 1

Maria Ashot London 22 hours ago Thank you for the article. Recently, Richard Quest of CNN filmed some segments on a cruise ship, showing the considerable quantities of food and beverages the modern ship carries. My immediate question: 'What happens to the waste? Do they haul it back to shore and recycle it? Or dump it in the ocean?' We should always be pressing for definitive answers to these questions, and making our consumption decisions accordingly. 3

B Doll NYC 22 hours ago People simply don't care. Even people who care don't care. In midtown Manhattan, here, ever tuna sandwich gets sliced in two in a sheath of white paper before it is inserted into an utterly superfluous clear plastic box. I refuse the box, of course, but what difference does it make? Multiply my one little sandwich by several thousand in just midtown in just one day. Think of it! Look at all those big Dynasty jewel cheesy plastic necklaces on all the girls. Not exactly Legacy jewelry, is it? It's fish kill. Now, back to the beginning: people don't think, they do not care. 9

jim fl 21 hours ago Well they're not paying attention. With a movement underway as here in CO where I Summer, people's mindsets change, and wasting the plastic looks like urinating in the street. So keep the ball rolling! 3

Tom Carberry Denver 22 hours ago Where does most of the plastic come from? I suspect lots from the USA, where people use millions of plastic shopping bags every day and eat in fast food places that thrive on plastic. And I suspect the other industrialized nations contribute most of the rest, with the vast majority of the world's citizens contributing very little. A fraction of the world's population causes lmost of the harm to the world's environment, just as a tiny fraction of the world's population causes all the wars, manufactures all the weapons, and profits from the suffering of the majority. 1

gbm New York 22 hours ago Plastic. It's what's for dinner. 1

Victor R. Grunden Indianapolis, IN 22 hours ago It appears there are those that doubt the reality of Capt. Moores' assertions. Anyone that has traveled has seen litter pickup crews along our roads and trash, mostly plastic, floating along shorelines, so the idea one needs to see videos, speaks more to ones' knowledge of water and wind flow along with deductive reasoning than anything. The difference between this and climate change is simply this. Plastic manufacturing regulations are based on greenhouse gas emissions, primarily CO2, and effluent water discharge at great cost and questionable environmental benefits. The end product which is a known long term pollutant is ignored beyond the ordinary littering laws. If plastic products are incinerated, the resulting emissions are highly regulated. Not for the toxic fumes as much as for the greenhouse gases like CO2. Plastics are useful in reducing transportation weight, spillage, breakage, better storage and shipping containers as in totes, lighter weight non-rusting vehicle components and numerous other uses. Sometimes more is less. A higher quality washable beverage plastic bottle with a deposit charge is one step that would result in less plastic. Blister packs are a response to shoplifting losses. Reducing source pollution, recycling, reusing and intercepting at critical junctures will help, but once it's in the ocean, the solutions are extremely limited. Skimming or vacuuming ocean waters has to take into account all the fish and other marine life affected. 3

Tim San Francisco 23 hours ago They should have a fee or tax on all plastic manufacturers based on production to fund major clean up programs 5

Attu McK, CA 23 hours ago For those who want photos of garbage patch destruction, visit Chris Jordan's documentation of the impacts of plastics on nesting albatross at Midway Island: http://www.chrisjordan.com/gallery/midway/#CF000313%2018x24 2

NYT Pick MBS Minneapolis 23 hours ago I live in a part of the country that's fairly remote -- not Mpls -- and as a result has very little resources for recycling. Aluminum cans can be recycled, and that's about it. They recently stopped collection of plastic bags because there was no market for them, and collecting them was a huge money-losing proposition. There is great interest in recycling, but the place is ill-equipped to do it: The local university set up outdoor recycling bins that were intended for students, faculty and staff; and the university footed the bill. But (I am told) over half of what was in the bins was coming from the larger community, and the univ removed the bins. They pointed out that while it was a worthwhile cause, it wasn't their job to be the recycling center for a community of 80,000. 10

H.G. N.J. 22 hours ago I also used to be very interested in recycling and was upset that Hawaii, where I used to live, did not, at the time, provide curb-side recycling. Then I learned what 'recycling' really means when it refers to plastics. The plastic bags that are returned for 'recycling' are not recycled back into plastic bags but are instead 'down-cycled' into things like polar fleece, which are not recyclable. The same is true of plastic bottles; because of health concerns, all plastic beverage bottles are made of virgin plastic. Moreover, most of what goes into recycling bins ends up in the landfills because there is no easy way to distinguish different types of plastic, and recycling companies only recycle containers that are obviously #1 or #2. In fact, this is why the plastics industry 'supports' recycling: when people believe that the plastic containers they use get recycled, they use more virgin plastic. The real solution is to avoid plastic as much as possible. Use reusable bags and bottles, and when you see trash on the streets, pick it up and put it in a trash can so that it doesn't end up in the waterways and get carried to the ocean. 2

Skeptic California 17 hours ago All the more reason for that university to bring that recycling center back, then! What a great community engagement project, potential revenue-genertor, and experiential learning opportunity for their students. Our university partners with an elementary school to compost food scraps from the cafeteria, and has started a vericulture revenue-generating project from it!

Nyalman New York 23 hours ago Not to date myself but apparently Mr. McGuire apparently had it all wrong! The Graduate Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word. Benjamin: Yes, sir. Mr. McGuire: Are you listening? Benjamin: Yes, I am. Mr. McGuire: Plastics. Benjamin: Exactly how do you mean? Mr. McGuire: There's a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk 4

Z. Whitall Right of center 23 hours ago When corporations make it cheaper, easier and more practical to reuse it than to manufacture it new, society will have solved the issue and the problem. Until then... 1

Doug New Jersey 23 hours ago Plastic bottles should be banned. Bags too. Go back to deposits for bottles. Please people, please stop the assault before its too late. 5

What me worry 23 hours ago Of course it is too much 'work ' to clean and recycle glass anythings!! (who remembers glass cocke bottles?? I remember the development in the 60s of plastic that would not let the carbonation escapes PS Can't it be burned as fuel?? just asking. 2

WmC Bokeelia, FL Yesterday Free market conservatives and environmentally conscious liberals should be able to agree on a solution to this and many similar problems: All negative externalities should be internalized. Or, in other words, the consumer of a product should pay its full price, including ALL costs associated with the manufacture, transport and disposal of that product. The producer and the consumer should bear the full burden of compensating society for any pollution---including CO2 pollution---generated at any stage in the process. 3

Michael F Yonkers, NY 20 hours ago Who would we be paying this to? 1

David Rosen Oakland, CA Yesterday How is it that we're walking around with a host of contaminants in our bodies and acting as if this were a matter less worthy of our attention than the football game or the latest episode of our favorite TV show? Now multiply this many times to account for climate change, for the deaths of millions of children annually from treatable diseases, for needless wars and many other such unfortunate matters. Do we really think that any of this is rational? What will it take to get people's attention? 3

Michael F Yonkers, NY 20 hours ago It will take much more than that. Children have been dying for millenia. Climate change is a constant and has been for millenia. Needless wars have been going on for millenia. Don't you understand this is the human condition. It always has been and there is no cogent reason at all to think it will ever change. 2

Craig Bebopper Not New York Yesterday Didn't I just read somewhere that Scott Brown has stated it is not scientifically proven that the glut of plastic in the oceans is due to activities by mankind? 8

Kevin IA Yesterday I just returned from a trip to the Yucatan, and even in remote, mostly uninhabited areas the amount of plastic debris on the shoreline was staggering. I have always tried to reduce the amount of plastic that I 'consume,' but observing the amount of garbage has made me re-double my efforts. 4

Martin New York Yesterday I've got it! Round up all the plastic and use it to build a huge dike around Florida for when the ocean level rise threatens to flood the state in a few decades. 2

Have a look!!! Germany Yesterday Watch out for 'The Ocean Cleanup' - Project of Boyan Slat, he developed a concept to clean the oceans from plastic pollution. It´s a nice and iteresting idea which should supported. If his idea will just reduce the pollution a little bit, it would be great. For more informations, go to: http://www.theoceancleanup.com/ He has a Crowdfundig Project to realize the next steps of his project and needs some support by sharing the project in social media.

H.G. N.J. 19 hours ago Before you get too excited, take a look at this: http://deepseanews.com/2014/07/the-ocean-cleanup-part-2-technical-review... The danger is that people who see or hear about this 'project' will feel justified in continuing to use single-use plastic items. If you really want to solve the problem, stop buying products wrapped in plastic, and sign up for or organize ocean/stream/neighborhood trash pickup activities.

B. Rothman NYC Yesterday Humans, with all their knowledge and book learning, are still a species too selfish and stupid to learn how to live in harmony with their environment. Hopefully it will eventually kill enough of us in the environmental backlash that a small number of our species will yet remain. 5

Wesley Clark, MD New York Yesterday Hey - we all got along fine 80 years ago when there was, essentially, NO plastic. We could do so again. It is, as with so many, many things, just a question of will. Ban plastic bags. Ban those ridiculous, impossible-to-open 'oystershell' containers. Ban packaging-within-packaging. Require (and subsidize, if necessary) the use of natural-fiber rope - the kind that EVERYONE used a few years ago - in fishing. Etc., etc. It's not that hard, but we need first to get over this poisonous idea that government is 'the problem.' Government is our friend - government is US! And government, strong government, will be needed to just step in and do the not-so-hard things needed to stop this. 13

Michael F Yonkers, NY 20 hours ago What would you replace them with?

richard kopperdahl new york city Yesterday On the bright side, most of these patches seem to be white or light in color; maybe they will partially replace the reflective power of the disappearing icecaps and slow global warming. Just a thought. 4

H.G. N.J. 22 hours ago Wishful thinking. By the time this happens, all the life in the oceans will have gone extinct. 1

NYT Pick Julia Oneonta Yesterday Just relocated to Maryland and I am impressed to see that plastic bags require a deposit. While five cents is a minute amount of money, just the fact that one is charged is a helpful reminder that each time I use a plastic bag. I am taking a small bite out of the environment. Over time this will have an impact. Kudos to the Maryland legislature! 32

Patrick Foy Miami Beach Yesterday I am happy that the global warming unrealists are addressing the issue of grocery store shopping bags, however, I think those black garbage bags will be a more intractable problem. In the meantime, we've been punked! In response to Mr. Charles Moore's article, a good friend who is an engineer and a graduate of Princeton, wrote me 'Where are the photos?' Clearly, the guy was skeptical. His question made sense in view of the article. Moore stated he had just returned from the Pacific, where he had been doing research. Often the New York Times will have a slide show to go along with certain articles. This should have been one of them. Anyway I went online and found the following: http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/info/patch.html and here: http://io9.com/5911969/lies-youve-been-told-about-the-pacific-garbage-patch As I've said, we've been punked! This may be a case similar to the devout global warming unrealists. They feel their cause is good and true, so they gotta embellish it. As a result, the climate change unrealists have been caught with their pants down, at least for the moment. Still, we must obviously figure out a way to eliminate man-made plastic waste. In this case, we know it's man-made and we know it's no good. So let's get to work on it! 1

bp294 Bronx Yesterday I and two friends were taking the ferry. on the Bosphorous, from Istanbul to the Princess Islands. Two of us were smoking and casually throwing out butts off the side. Our French friend, a journalist and someone who's keenly aware of such things, reprimanded us severely. He said that as a result of cigarette butts' hard, plastic-like material, dolphins were choking to death on them. Within the last decade and half dolphins that had cavorted in the river for millennium, now stayed away completely. Sobering thought! 6

NYT Pick Raghu India Yesterday I'm really glad that activism against plastic disposal has proved to be successful in the west . In a different vein, third world countries like India, fail miserably in both having an awareness among the public and also maintaining standards and restrictions germane to decrease plastic disposal. Far from employing filtering mechanisms to withhold plastic materials at drainage outlets, the municipalities (at least in my city in South India) do not mandate the treatment of drainage before its release into the ocean. This nonchalance shown both by common people and officials amazes me. Few scenarios in an Indian city would include the following: Garbage accumulates everywhere else except at the designated places, thrash cans provided by the municipality go unmonitored and overflowing for weeks before the garbage disposal van finally turns up. , overflowing manholes due to a blocked drainage pipe and many more. We Indians, need to employ a holistic approach: strong at both awareness and codification of laws. 21

Tom Carberry Denver 22 hours ago 'do not mandate the treatment of drainage before its release into the ocean.' You raise a separate, but equally important, issue -- the flushing of human feces and more into our drinking water. It makes no sense, because human feces has tremendous value to agriculture, but people flush this valuable commodity into their drinking water and either flush it into the ocean -- humanity's universal trash can -- or spend billions of dollars cleaning it every year. Denver, Co, a city of less than 1 million people, spends $100,000 million a year in operating costs cleaning feces out of its drinking water. This figure doesn't include the massive amounts of money that went into building the infrastructure of sewage lines and cleaning plants. So think what the mega cities of the world either spend cleaning feces from the water or the massive quantities of untreated feces they flush into the oceans. 1

Annie Hayes Massachusetts Yesterday We take for granted eating meat, preparing meat, shopping for meat. For most of us it's who we are. But who we could be offers a better life for all creatures of this beautiful unique, living earth. What about changing behavior by learning how much climate change is caused by methane, 25 x more potent a greenhouse gas than CO2, and how much methane is emitted by the animals we feel we must eat? That amount is 14.5 % of all human-made greenhouse gas emissions, greater than combined global emissions from all cars, trains, boats and planes. (Dr. Michael Mosley, BBC Horizon). Added to this, the demands for livestock for food is said to double in 40 years. At the same time, California, a national model for greenhouse gas reduction, realizing climate change consequences of water shortage, forest fires, increased sea level rise and population increase to compound all these, has comitted to lowering its greenhouse gases 80% by 2050. If we do the math, living on vegetables, unwrapped in plastic, toted home in a basket along with nuts and grains etc. can be exceedingly healthy, much more efficient by calorie per acre, involves no animal suffering and gets us far closer to the desired reductions. Our kids, for one, sure hope we do the math. Cows and sheep being ruminants are the greatest methane producers, chicken and mussels the least. A vegetarian diet has such wonderful options and flavors that allow us to have our sweet planet and eat it too. 7

mdhtallahassee Tallahassee, FL Yesterday Time to tax to death anything that isn't biodegradable. 13

sapereaudeprime Searsmont, Maine 04973 Yesterday Not to worry. Industrial fishing interests have already killed 0ver 95% of nearly every species of edible marine life on such traditional fishing grounds as the Grand Banks and the Gulf of Maine, and corporate fishing interests continue to spew mendacity and duplicity even as they vacuum up the last of those species. The likelihood is that corporate trawlers and seiners will kill the survivors before plastic gets a chance to eliminate them. Your discarded plastic bag is merely the coup de grace. 10

Cjmesq0 Bronx, NY Yesterday Really? Another phoney ecological disaster in the making here. If we get rid of plastic bags in our grocery shopping we will see the rise of diseases all over the country. These canvass bags merely pass germs and toxins from user to user. Plastic bags are disposable, which means cleaner and safer. 2

Julia Oneonta Yesterday Disposable to where, exactly? Your backyard? 1

fuller schmidt Chicago Yesterday Absolutely. Republicans have proven that science and facts are hoaxes - although you swerve to quote the science theory of germs. 1

SEE ALL REPLIES Tom Cuddy Texas Yesterday Austin Texas banned plastic grocery bags. almost instantly there were far fewer bags on roadsides and hanging from trees and fences. Worked quicker than I, an advocate oif the ban, could have dreamed of. Do not let the whiner's and industry shills fool ya; bag bans work 15

Ben Franklin Seattle WA Yesterday Actually, sometimes the progress of technology cures the problems that it causes. This is the case with the plastic bag problem. See http://earthnurture.com

Disconcerted USA Yesterday The solution is one I am working on as a proposal for a TED project. My proposal involves the request for moneys to collect the plastic masses in the ocean on a tanker type boat with large machinery for shredding the varied types of plastic. Mr. Moore is correct about plastic's general inability to become a recyclable material. 1) collect, sort, and shred the plastic on site on a boat/tanker 2) make available the shredded material for purchase with the sole intent to use in projects involving reflecting the sun's rays in the arctic and antarctic circles. The problem with shredding plastic is that it outgases plastic chemicals, as much as it deteriorates in water or earth. The ubiquitous plastics that we use for finishes, oils, paints, clothing material, and in cosmetics are produced from white oil which is a bi-product of petroleum oil refinement. As such, it is not impossible to reduce plastics to another compound though not inexpensive. But collection, shredding and conversion of the plastic refuse in oceans to a compound to use in the manufacturer of another material is the only solution for saving our oceans from plastic contamination. The solution to plastic contamination is a massive and ongoing garbage pickup of those plastic masses. It is also job generating. 3

H.G. N.J. 22 hours ago Please demonstrate that you can actually collect the plastic in the oceans. Until then, this is nothing but a thought experiment. See also: http://boingboing.net/2013/03/27/ocean-scientists-say-19-year-o.html 1

NYT Pick Nora01 New England Yesterday I decided years ago to make our home and my life a plastic-free zone as far as practicable. it is both fairly easy and pleasurable to accomplish I am pleased to report. It takes a bit of effort initially to consider alternatives to plastic, but it becomes automatic.My awareness only grows. We know the earth is in danger from our wastefulness. We can see climate change occurring. Given this, I am outraged by the continued over-packaging of products. It is totally unnecessary most of the time, just pure waste. The most recent giant increase in the needless use of plastic is the individual serving of coffee know as the k-cup. How can we allow, how can we participate in the wastefulness of single serving coffee in a plastic container? Is it really so hard to to take an extra few minutes to make a single serving in a French press instead? Really? Think about what you can do to stop the waste. If we don't buy the stupidly over-packaged items, they will stop making them. 70

lee chew new york city Yesterday nespresso accepts their used coffee pods at all their stores for recycling. 1

NYT Pick MJ Palo Alto, CA 19 hours ago I've been trying to reduce my use of plastic, it's a creative venture. I no longer shop at Trader Joe's because of their incessant plastic packaging. Instead, I recycle my existing plastic bags at the bulk bins at Whole Foods. Return to the old fashioned practice of cooking from scratch (yogurt, bread), it's a lifestyle. Rather than ban bottled water, cities can educate and offer refill stations for water bottles (not just drinking fountains). It's a mindset, plastic is pervasive in our lives and we need to learn to consider when we reach for products packaged in plastic - if we care. 9

XY NYC Yesterday The best way to save the ocean; to protect animals; and to live healthier is to become vegan. Don't eat meat or fish. Let your friends and politicians know that you're vegan because you care about the environment and animals. It makes a big impression, because actions speak louder than words. Then little by little, as more people become vegan, the political landscape will reflect this caring philosophy, and laws will be crafted to solve these environmental tragedies. 3

Jerry Frey Columbus Yesterday 'Everywhere: A rockfish in a shoe. The study took place over the course of 22 years and found trash everywhere they looked on the sea floor along the West Coast and around the Hawaiian Islands' All of our national and many global problems are self-inflicted because there's no leadership. http://napoleonlive.info/see-the-evidence/oceans-are-dying-sos-planet-2/ 2

Dean S Milwaukee Yesterday Maybe after climate change, the floating island of plastic will be the last refuge for humans. 2

Dirk Benthien Germany Yesterday While by no means a solution to the problem, a legally required deposit of 25 cents (Euro) or about 0. 33 US $ per bottle in Germany when purchased helps tremendously because either purchasers or homeless people or kids return them to stores to collect the money. In the stores they are recycled to be used as a raw material. There are definitely fewer bottles in German lakes or the Baltic Sea than in many other international waters. Currently traveling in China, I'm guilty of buying bottled water myself since I don't trust the water quality here. And the bottles end up in the trash thanks to no deposit. 5

Angela Haseltine Pozzi WashedAshore.org Yesterday Thank you Captain Moore for a very concise summary of a major issue that needs to be seen and talked about more often. Please help us at washedashore.org to educate and remind the world about this serious problem.

RG Corte Madera, CA Yesterday Would it be great if there were an environmentally benign readily biodegradable material produced from waste (better yet, a waste greenhouse gas) capable of replacing damaging conventional fossil based plastics? How about if discarded after use, this material together with other organic waste from our cities and farms could be digested by naturally existing microorganisms to produce methane for production of fresh material in a closed loop cradle-to-cradle process? How wonderful if we could simultaneously combat: climate change oceanic, fresh water, and land petro-plastic debris microbead pollution of fresh water and marine environments contamination of food chain with POPs (persistent organic pollutants) Yes, we can! See MangoMaterials.com (disclosure I’m associated) BobG@ 2

NYT Pick Jim Montague Skokie, IL Yesterday How about just picking it up? Capture as much can be reasonably captured, recycle as much as can be recycled, and efficiently landfill or incinerate the rest for power. Many landfills are being 'mined' for fuel. Why not do the same for the oceans, and protect some wildlife at the same time? Transport costs are high, of course, but it could be worthwhile. It's way past time we picked up after ourselves like adults we're supposed to be. 17

james hadley providence, ri Yesterday Mr. Montague has the answer, no doubt about it. As David Harvey points out in his book on the contradictions of capitalism, our system finds ways to monetize everything, including its owm mistakes. We are careless in our rush to grow fish for profit? Well, let's pay someone to clean it up - create an entire new industry with new jobs to go along with it. And we'll just keep on keeping on with this until the entire planet breaks down. Sad, isn't it. 2

NYT Pick Julia Oneonta Yesterday The problem is that our entire economic system is based on producers not having to have any sort of plan for how their products will be 'picked up.' It is the achilles heel of America's economic model, which unfortunately we have exported all over the globe. Now the genie is out of the bottle, and business people become enraged if you suggest that environmental impacts are their responsibility. 44

SEE ALL REPLIES Steve Mumford NYC Yesterday I've got one word for you: Glass. 8

Dean S Milwaukee Yesterday I think we should try to corral all of the debris into a solid, floating island, and maroon convicted polluters there. 3

Apple Jack Oregon Cascades Yesterday Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim has suggested we go to a 3 hour work day. Convenience & 'necessity' have pushed a harried & exhausted population to opt for packaging & containers that don't leak or require special care in transport & storage & that are light & easily 'disposed' of. With more time in their lives, people can use sustainable glass & cloth for those purposes & avoid filling the garbage can with plastic Educating the low brows will take some effort, but will pay in the future. Govt might have to be involved & a fight will ensue with the fast buck guys & regressives, so what else is new. 4

Joe Yohka New York Yesterday I'm concerned, but have no idea what to do about this. I wish Captain Moore could give us a bit more guidance on what we could do as a society, and as individuals. 2

Dan S Yesterday Reduce, Reuse, Refuse. We need to add the third R to the equation and make it culturally acceptable and normal to reuse what we have (bottles, bags, etc) and to decline the convenience of new containers and products just because they are cheap and plentiful. Consumers, all of us, we need to take the lead and not wait. 4

Roger Faires Portland, Oregon Yesterday I appreciate this story very much . . Yet am frustrated by what is stated in the first paragraph, ' . . but it's choking our future in ways that most of us are barely aware' since I first read about this problem in an excellent and under-read San Pedro/L.A. muckraking paper called Random Lengths some 15 years ago. Of course only a few thousand read it I'm sure. If you ever get to any beach again . . but lets just say the beach at Ft. Stevens State Park here on the Oregon Coast you will find, several times a year, an uncountable (and I mean that) collection of little plastic nobules that are used in the manufacture of a zillion things synthetic. They wash up under certain conditions. That is just one beach in pretty damn near perfect state. Imagine what beaches in Asia must be awash with!? Since a lot of plastics are made there. That's not even thinking about what's IN the ocean. Do we even deserve this planet? The 'no' answer could be argued for, respectably all day long and into the night with a straight and honest face. Folks, we are destroying this home, this nest of ours. I am guilty but I have changed a lot of my ways. Not enough I dare say. I need to change more. Will you help me and join us in changing for the better? Hope so. I'm not saying there is a god but let's just say there is - Forget about knocking on heavens door when you're done. He'll just hand you a garbage bag and say, 'Go back home and fix that mess NOW!' 4

Dulcie Leimbach ny ny Yesterday Microplastics, like beads in toothpaste, gels and facial cleansers are a growing part of marine litter: http://passblue.com/2014/07/07/the-growing-threat-of-plastic-in-marine-l... 3

Mike Baker Montreal Yesterday I can't help but think again about Raymond C. Anderson and his climb up Mount Sustainability, into the headwinds of what he referred to as our take-make-waste habits. Quiet spoken humble Ray was nevertheless a fierce competitor. And you'd think the last place you'd find an honest-to-goodness eco warrior would have been in the c-suite of a billion dollar synthetic carpet manufacturer. There's a lot of 'green washing' going on in Corporationland. In Canada, Syncrude places frequent TV spots about its ecological 'responsibilities' - Syncrude of course being one of the big players in that horror of horrors up in Northern Alberta known to many as the tar sands. This peculiar 'craft' was born after the Exxon Valdez ran aground, recycled when BP blew its stack. Ray talked the talk but walked the walk even better. The models and methods that he brought forward and forced on his own company are the stuff of ecological legend; the very things that industry says are impossible, too expensive, so much so that they'd have to be passed on to consumers. For them, it's rake in profit but externalize the costs of moral laziness. Raymond Anderson proved them all wrong and made his company more profitable than ever as they transformed a linear take-make-waste operation into a closed and cost-cutting supply loop. How it is that so few people have heard of Raymond Anderson remains a mystery to me. And the thousands of vision-ridden CEO's in Corporationland would like to keep it that way. 2

G Love Arlandria Yesterday I put our chances at about zero. Literally, almost no one cares about the environment. The percentage of people who recycle even half of everything they buy/use? I'd put it at less than 1% in the US, and even lower in poorer countries (though higher somewhat in Europe). I've lived an upper middle class existence for several decades as an adult, and not one place that I've ever lived or worked - not one - has recycled even a significant minority of the products that are recyclable. They have no interest - even when it is actually EASIER to recycle than put something in the trash. Currently, I work in an office with other holistic physicians - one of the most likely of all groups in our society to recycle? Wrong. The recycling bin lies there collecting almost nothing, while the trash (which actually takes more effort b/c you have to open the cabinet door) accumulates all kinds of plastic, glass and metal. All the other suites in our commercial building are even worse - not one of them recycles anything but a few large cardboard boxes here and there. These are attorneys, engineers, patent examiners, realtors, dentists, etc I don't know a single person other than my two sisters who takes recycling even remotely seriously. I've said it since I first became aware in the early 1990's - the only thing that will create true recycling is strict laws against throwing out recyclables - with jail time for offense. But of course, our society doesn't care. We deserve what we get. 7

kathy florida Yesterday Yes, 'we're all going to die' at some point...Plastic bags do sevre a purpose but are we being responsible with our excessive use? Check out the documnetary www.bagitmovie.com Even if they are deemed 'environmenatlly friendly' - shouldn't we be cautiouslly consumptious... 1

Andy Hain Carmel, CA Yesterday Interesting, indeed, but what is the quickest way to rid seven billion people of their very worst habit? Electric shock treatments?

Doug Brooklyn, NY Yesterday this obviously isn't the complete solution, but how about technologies like this? http://www.theoceancleanup.com/

Sabrina Bright NYC Yesterday I've been hearing about several projects that aim to replace plastic food containers with edible ones. Which would be great - even before these plastic containers gets into the ocean or a landfill, they hold our food. Some types have the potential to leach chemicals into our food, hormone disruptors such as phthalates and bisphenol-A. Unfortunately, there are no edible food containers I can get right now (I really want to try one). There's one type that's being sold in Boston - Stonyfield fro-yo wrapped in an edible skin that is washed like a fruit before consumption. Another company offers yuzu and pink grapefruit flavored party cups, but it costs twelve dollars for a four pack... yeesh! Here's an article on edible food containers if you want to read more: http://brightfuturedevice.com/2014/08/edible-food-containers-a-new-way-o...

oxfdblue Staten Island, NY Yesterday I'm waiting for a Republican or group of them to announce that these garbage patches are just another left wing, liberal lie, like global warming. Until we actually have a Congress with brains in their head and not mush, nothing major will get done. 3

Joseph Pesco Manhattan 22 hours ago Yes, I agree about party biased reactions to this and similar problems. Wisdom and brains are two different attributes though. We've outlawed incandescent light bulbs, because CFS light bulbs were becoming marketable. I'll bet few presenting the case to the Congress mentioned LEDs could eclipse the CFS light bulbs before the ban on incandescent light bulbs became dominate. Wasn't the ban a knee jerk reaction to negative comments about the color of CFS light bulbs from consumers? Then industry pointed the elected officials in the right direction - I'm guessing industry did that with money.

Buster Idaho Yesterday In our small town, the bridge that spans the river is often decorated with plastic streamers to commemorate various causes. Unfortunately, the wind blows hard most of the time and what's usually left of the thousands of streamers after a few days is the knot, the rest goes right into the Snake River; then the Pacific Ocean. The last such event was the Relay for Life for the American Cancer Society. A lady I know was commenting on how inspirational the streamers that had been tied to the bridge were. I wondered if there were corn starch based streamers that could be used instead because of the pollution concern. She accused me of being politically correct and to stop it. Argh! 4

Scott Boston Yesterday I am stunned that some corporation out there that currently makes millions of dollars in recycling plastic into usable goods hasn't jumped at the chance to get FREE plastic for their products. Clean up the planet, make a buck. There are potentially billions of dollars just floating out there in the ocean. Two birds, one stone. 3

MP FL Yesterday we are killing our planet and all life on it. Man is unable to act proactively because of greed and a ridiculous belief by many that god gave them this planet. I often think there may have been or should have been a Star Trek episode where the Enterprise visited a dying planet. That may be the only thing that might have worked. We are too far gone with too many people srill breeding like rats with a few special money interests delaying any real proactive action. what a horrible legacy we are leaving. 2

Tsultrim CO Yesterday It's not that hard to use reusable, cloth grocery bags. The canvas ones are especially strong and good. If I can teach myself to do it (and I did), so can others. I'm not so disciplined that it was immediately my method. It took a little time and attention. When the rare occasion arises that I forget my bags, I use paper. It recycles easily. Paper can now be made from recycled paper, and renewable crops like hemp. Are we really so very spoiled we can't give up one tiny perceived comfort? We don't need styrofoam. We don't need all kinds of things. It's not that hard to change. And food shouldn't be stored in plastic anyway. Too many chemicals leach out into it. The BPA problem was only one. I have no sympathy for those complaining. Grow up and learn to take care of your world, because not only you live in it. The rest of us do too, along with all life. 2

Anthony Sunnyside, Queens Yesterday Horrendous for future generations. Amazing how over 8 million people in NYC area alone are using plastic bags virtually everyday. We shoud all be ashamed of ourselves. Why can't we put political and economic pressure on our city council to ban 90% of plastic bag use in our city? [take out restaurants can be except at outset]. We are a 'world class city' and should set an example not act like paralzyed ignorant folk who ignore the problem and go about our business. It's time to stop accepting the stage corporate and politicans set for us and take humane and intelligent actions to start a process of cleaning up our environment one city at a time in our own nation. Europeans think we are pure hypocrites as they put progressive intelligent things in place to ward off pollution and global warming while our governments provide lip service with a Big Oil smile. This has got to start with us ! No more waiting for our political system to act because it won't unless it is good for Wall Stree of which their portfolios are beholden to. It's time for people to stand up in our broken, bought & sold democracy and say enough of the madness. How many billions of more plastic bags and food take out containers are we gonna shove back into the environemnt before we get it? See the documentary PLASTIC PLANET on YouTube or NetFlix and you will visually see the islands of plastic out at sea and so much more. And yes the fish are eating this toxic soup...and we eat the fish ! 2

FrankF NYC Yesterday We need more pictures of this Texas sized patch of garbage. Only then will people believe. (besides those of us who spend time on the ocean shores and see all the junk washing up) 3

Dwight Jones Vancouver Yesterday Deposits on beverage containers do contain their spread. We need a deposit on every use of plastic, and as pointed out, make that plastic recyclable. Boycotting plastic bags has stalled and needs more attention as well. 1

magicisnotreal earth Yesterday I saw this article on a news papers website a few days ago. http://www.livescience.com/46598-ocean-plastic-is-missing.html Is it phony paid for science or legitimate disagreement or interpretation of the same data? The subjective evaluation of visible garbage is emotive and grabs clicks but doesn't really address the problem or actual quantity of plastic and other non biodegradable garbage in our oceans. Like most things on earth plastic will eventually break down to pieces too small to see with the naked eye and I figure that is where the stuff has gone. It's been being dumped since before the human race knew we had a negative effect on the planet so there is a lot of it out there. I have doubts about subjective reports that lack photographs or aerial video that gives proper perspective on any particular patch. Which BTW is what the 'garbage patch' actually is, a series of patches that circulate in the same general geographic area. 1

MLH Rural America 22 hours ago Having read the same article and noted there was no mention of it in this article one wonders if this is a biased rebuttal of the article you referenced. Furthermore I would like to see visual proof that as much as 40% of our ocean surfaces are covered with plastic formed with other debris. And what is this other debris? Is debris (normally considered rubbish or trash) being purposely misused to imply this is all man-made when in fact most of it is naturally occurring such as sea weed? And I would love to see the basis for the assertion of 2.3 billion pieces of plastic in 3 days. Is this breaking down every Styrofoam cup into individual cells for shock effect? Now I have no idea of the validity, source, or purpose, if there is one, of either article but skepticism is always the best place to start.

Joseph Pesco Manhattan Yesterday Only just a tiny bit of foolishness here: it is well known that a boat is a hole in the water that you pour money into; almost as well known: a subway is a hole in the ground (during storms) you pour water into. New to the equation: a skyscraper is hole in the sky you plan money to pour from. What we need is a hole in the water to bulldoze the plastic into. The only thing we know for sure is that a hole in the water requires much money. Conclusion: if fewer plastics get in the water it will cost us less money to manage the problem, and there will be more room for cruise ships to play.

Paul Phoenix, AZ Yesterday Conservatives in this country will say none of this is true because ultimately to fix it means giving up doing whatever they want and costing them money. A conservative being told no and a conservative having to pay for something is the foundation of their belief in less government and lower taxes. 1

NYT Pick Save the Farms Illinois Yesterday Surprisingly, disposable plastic bags have the lowest Carbon footprint for grocery shopping. Six of the filmy plastic bags per week for a year 'equates' to 8.4 kg/yr Carbon when all inputs are considered. Just three paper bags per week for a year equals 9.4 kg/yr of Carbon when all inputs are considered. The worst is the reusable bag - recycled plastic starts at 200X the filmy plastic bags. Wash your reusable bag once a month to reduce cross-contamination from foods and the Carbon inputs jump to 36 kg/yr (beyond the initial 200X). Look honestly at what you buy someday and you see that most of it is packed in plastic. That's probably fine because I'd much rather buy plastic wrapped meat and fish Vs. tossing a slab of ribs into the basket and on the conveyer to be weighted by the checker handling money from everybody. Plastic prevents a lot of disease. The issue is not plastic Vs. paper Vs. reusable bags - it's 'safe clean food' made possible by plastic Vs. 'unsafe contaminated food.' 18

JImb Edmonton canada 20 hours ago It's lucky the human race survived before the introduction of plastic because of all the food eaten and carried without plastic's 'benefits.'

Cindy-L Woodside, CA 19 hours ago Before reading your comment I made a similar comment. I disagree with you on one point. I do not think that the users of the 'reusable' plastic bags wash them when they get dirty. Most likely they throw them out. 1

SEE ALL REPLIES Realist NYC Yesterday I love America and the Freedom she allows. I am tired of everyone telling me what I should drive, what I should eat, what I should buy, all in the name of environment. There are many solutions to these problems, I refuse to stop consumption and lose my freedom of choice. I lived many years in a third world country where my freedom was curtailed daily in the name of 'greater collective good', no more. There is always a solution, if the problem become large enough. 1

sapereaudeprime Searsmont, Maine 04973 Yesterday If you think that littering is an act of freedom, go back where you came from. 5

Realist NY Yesterday Consumption is not the same as littering. The tree-huggers are getting radical. The simple fact is, Oil at $90 a barrel will not solve energy crisis, but Oil at $300 a barrel will solve the crisis quickly. 2

Mike Mendelsohn Boulder, CO Yesterday Great essay - such an important topic. But why didn't you include photos? The world need to see this - in graphic detail - as well as read about it. 5

Someone Northeast Yesterday This is heart breaking. I just got home from shopping, and I had considered buying a plastic storage bin for my office, but decided to think about it. Now I definitely won't. I'll find something wood or wicker. But the store was jammed with bright plastic back-to-school supplies of all kinds. Probably a lot of them will end up in the ocean. 3

roger124 BC Yesterday 'The reality is that only by preventing manmade debris — most of which is disposable plastic — from getting to the ocean in the first place will a measurable reduction in the ocean’s plastic load be accomplished.' This article seems to ignore the fact that there is still several humongous collections of plastic that should, maybe even must, be cleaned up. So what if it is not profitable. Maybe just put an environment tax on all plastic goods that may wind up in the oceans then use it for the clean up. The tax doesn't have to be punitive but should be only used to resolve these issues. 2

Max Farthington DC Yesterday Perhaps genetically-modified bacteria that can utilize plastics as a source of energy and produce a biologically harmless (or less harmful) waste are needed. That could quickly go sideways, but some day we might adjudge the effort worthwhile. 1

Chuck Ray Brook , NY Yesterday A solution like this could easily have disastrous and unintended consequence, like importing rabbits to Australia. 3

Don Fitzgerald Illinois Yesterday Petro-chemicals will be the death of this planet, yet! 1

NYT Pick Robert Iserbyt Rockport Maine Yesterday All this talk of eliminating trash from the ocean is noteworthy, but only a small step toward dealing with the problem. If we can drill for oil 300000 ft under the seafloor with massive rigs and ships that pump this oil to make this plastic, why cant we build ships that recover the plastic with giant nets and then burn the stuff to power these vessels. They could pull into remote third world countries and sort and recycle and burn the less toxic plastic for energy. The scrubbers to filter the emissions exist, the ships exist, but sadly the will does not. WHY? you may ask....Well it cuts into the profits of the multinational corporations. There is no accountability in the corporate maelstrom of production, human consumption and then the big throw away. If it was profitable to do the above recovery of the worlds ocean garbage, well then things would change. Until then, don't count on it. Instead ready yourself for more War cause that is where the money is. 53

Wilburpup Virginia Yesterday Banning plastic grocery bags would leave me without a convenient way to clean up after my dog on city streets. And I don't throw them in the ocean. 2

Marc undefined Yesterday It is all about convenience. How convenient (for you).

Sharon, Brooklyn Heights Brookyn Heights, NY Yesterday You don't take on this problem without taking on Dow Chemical, Chevron Phillips, BASF, Dupont, and Exxon Mobile Chemical - just a handful of the giants in the petrochemical industry. They have systematically reconstructed our ideas about food consumption - inventing completely useless, and in fact harmful ways to package foods - all invented to fatten their bottom lines. If we wake up to the ways in which these and many other companies are poisoning our bodies directly and indirectly through the environmental damage they create, they will find themselves on the brink of collapse. Do you think the disparaging characterization of people who care for the environment as loonies and 'tree-huggers' is common sense? Or have we all been treated to a massive and corrosive PR campaign created to keep the crony capitalist system afloat? Who is willing to take them on? Clearly it isn't any of our politicians from either party. Clearly it isn't the media including The New York Times. Who are the Davids that will take on these Goliaths? 6

todd New York, N.Y. Yesterday People are CRAZY about plastic garbage bags. Using them for luggage and every conceivable chore, and they are easier and cheaper to make.

AO JC NJ Yesterday Since business are people too - and people have a right to destroy themselves through their bad habits - them businesses have the right to destroy everyone. 1

an observer comments Yesterday In New York city all garbage is put to the curb in giant black, blue or clear plastic bags for collection by the dept of Sanitation. We used to drag barrels to the curb, the contents of which were dumped into the garbage truck and then the empty barrel left on the sidewalk. It is good to line the barrels with plastic bags to keep them clean, but can't the bags be left in the barrel and reused instead of being dumped into the garbage truck. think of the hundreds of millions of large plastic bags NYC dumps in landfills each year. 2

dave commenter calif Yesterday Since the fish stock is so badly depleted, use all the factory ships to clean up the plastic. Combine that with the inventor of the small machine that turns plastic into oil ---sort of whaling but without killing any whales. If it is in the Pacific, then let every country pay a share of the cost based on population and consumption. I have seen pictures of dead baby albatrosses , their bodies decayed showing all sorts of plastic in their stomach area. Starved to death on man's waste. Man, as steward of the earth, is a total failure. 2

Paul Benjamin Massachusetts Yesterday Why doesn't someone pay all those whaling fleets to stop whaling and use those giant whale processing factory ships to clean up the plastic? 2

Kevin New York, NY Yesterday Interesting that California is considering a statewide ban of consumer plastic bags. What are they considering for the enormous use of plastics in industrial packaging and commercial shipping? Nothing?

BC Hoboken, NJ Yesterday This report about plastic in the ocean reminds me of a shamanism seminar I attended about 25 years ago. The shaman mentioned that plastic garbage was being found everywhere in the environment, including the ocean. Also, he had noticed demonstrations by the 'Save Planet Earth' group. So, he decided to use his shamanic abilities to commune with Planet Earth to determine how serious the situation was. There was 'Good News', 'Bad News', & 'Not So Good, but Interesting News' received. 'Good News' - The shaman said that the message received from Planet Earth was that the planet itself is not in danger and plans to keep spinning merrily around the sun for at at least another 250,000 years. 'Bad News' received was that, unfortunately, humans at their current level of consciousness could easily knock themselves into extinction. 'Not So Good, but Interesting News' - the shaman said if humans become extinct, Planet Earth will simply evolve a replacement species, give or take 10,000 years or so, And, because people have thrown out so much plastic into the environment, the new species will likely have plastic molecules in its structure, molecules that could only have been created by human societies. I'm unable to confirm the veracity of the shaman's revelations or whether he was speaking 'tongue in cheek' but there are questions we need to reflect on: What kind of world are we making, what type of future are we creating? 2

George Young Chicago, IL Yesterday 1967 - The Graduate This is Benjamin. He's a little worried about his future. Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word. Benjamin: Yes, sir. Mr. McGuire: Are you listening? Benjamin: Yes, I am. Mr. McGuire: Plastics. Benjamin: Exactly how do you mean? Mr. McGuire: There's a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it? 2

S I New York Yesterday My daughter is forever chastising me. I am always wrong. I bag my groceries in plastic or paper.The first because I am choking our planet and the latter because I am vanquishing all the forests. She hates my cooking because I don't always buy organic and do not look out for farm fresh, pesticide free. She is a vegan because there is an animal slaughtered for every piece of meat on our table,eggs because they are not cage-free.All the meat is polluted with hormones and antibiotics and not grass grazed.Their feed itself is abhorrent to her because it is made of corn(polluted with pesticides)and bodyparts of themselves. She is disgusted with milk and milk products because not only are there hormones and antibiotics laden but the sows are kept constantly pregnant and pregnant on their feet 24/7 with no room for manouvre.As for the fish, we are over-fishing,depleting species after species and filling up our oceans with man-made poisons.Species after species are getting extinct because we humans are destroying their habitat. She is thin as a reed and did I mention an Environmental Science Graduate? Perhaps sending her to an expensive private school,disappearing right before my eyes was a bad idea or have I and my consumer generation botched it all up for her and her future progeny. To her right now I am the biggest villain My SUV, she does not ride in it.She does not own a car and continues to live in Boston. Global Warming-well,that's for another day. God! do I feel guilty ! 5

Harry Michigan Yesterday Now let's hear from the deniers. Humans can not degrade our environment, God won't let it happen. I will die a very distressed person, not for humanity but our beautiful blue planet.

Relieved in Kansas Overland Park, KS Yesterday Like quite a few relatively wealthy Westerners, I've entertained the hope of spending some of my retirement on a sailboat exploring some of the world's oceans, seas and coastal areas. Seems like a depressing prospect now. Despite mankind's unparalleled rise and dominion over this planet, I fear we are only a few generations from it all crashing down. Scientific consensus is no match for the unstoppable inertia of human 'progress'. 2

Diane B Boston Yesterday I buy fresh yogurt from my local Greek market. I brought in the container that I had from the previous batch I bought for a refill and was told she couldn't refill it due to health codes. I was really surprised and thought it was stupid, so now i have to have all these plastic containers that I don't want, but i try to use them for other stuff or recycle them. We are all so dumb. Who said 'humans are a scourge on the earth'?

Jim Murray Saint Paul MN Yesterday Crossing the Pacific on an army troopship in January 1948, it was customary to dump garbage into the ocean off the fantail after meals. A flock of sea birds following the ship were waiting for the feast, diving into what we had left on our plates and soon disappeared in our wake. But then they were back for the next meal, and the next, for days on end. Nowadays on cruises, there are no birds following because of a law against dumping. But those birds had happy meals, were a grand sight and we had a clean galley. 1

TEO California Yesterday Like Tim B., I too grew up in the 50s, with extension into the 60s and 70s. We were taught NOT to litter. We didn't have the abundance of fast food outlets that we have now, no where even close. (Our town did not get to its first McDonald's until about 1971.) Though the entire problem can't be blamed on the fast food industry, it certainly seems to be a big part of it. I have participated in a few river/creek clean up programs and have found a lot of fast food containers lining the banks of waterways and indeed in the water itself. I do brag that I have never knowingly littered, but my wife points out that when I spit my used gum out the window, that is littering. Guilty as charged. We recycle probably 99% of our household goods. Except during household/garage cleanups, like now, we have one small 45 gallon can and if there is one foot of debris in it from week to week, that is a lot. Unfortunately littering has become common place. It's a cultural thing. 3

The Poet McTeagle California Yesterday What baffles me is that people are still willing to eat seafood.

Zsolt L Paris Yesterday Of course, oceans should be clean and unpolluted. They will not be clean and unpolluted in our lifetime. We may and should ban plastic grocery bags and bottles, but as the author has also recognized, a tsunamis will washs inevitably and regularly thousands of tonnes of plastic into the oceans. In the meantime, I would sleep better if somebody could find some POSITIVE effects of plastic garbage on marine life. I could imagine some, like providing shade, shelter for young fish, etc, just like the oil platforms that may act also as artifical reefs. Paradoxically, the artificial 'enrichment' provided by human activity can also have such positive effects on wildlife. 1

Carl Hultberg New Hampshire Yesterday The main source of plastic waste is packaging. Why is there excess packaging? Two reasons: convenience, and to foil shoplifters. Sounds like a social problem. 2

Alex Sanchez Yesterday I recently watched Mission Blue, a documentary on Netflix. Chief scientist & ocean lover Sylvia Earle is campaigning for legally protected ocean zones much like national forests are protected today. We must protect our oceans. Get involved – http://mission-blue.org/

PC Northeast Ohio Yesterday Vice Media made a documentary with Moore of an expedition to the garbage patch a few years ago. It provides a good look at the phenomenon and its magnitude. http://www.vice.com/toxic/toxic-garbage-island-1-of-3

Nan Socolow West Palm Beach, FL Yesterday Thank you, Charles Moore, for dealing with the horrific facts of the waste plastic gyres that are smothering our oceans. Alas, photos of these dead zones - the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and 5 other patches - should have accompanied your trenchant piece! Before plastic, we carried our unplastic packaged groceries home in brown paper bags from the A&Ps or Grand Unions or mom and pop groceries. - no foam plastic boats covered in plastic wrap cradling raw meats and vegetables, meats and fish were packaged in thin red and white cardboard 'boats', only waxed paper in sight in those days. Today our oceans are choking sea life in '6-pack plastic soda pop rings, small and huge plastic water bottles, in small one-dose plastic coffee dispensers, in vast quantities of foam 'packing peanuts' and jelly-fish looking plastic pillows to cradle our boughten 'stuff'. These grievously shameful gyres in the Pacific Ocean will never be biodegraded and we shall have to find another planet in our galaxy or a neighboring one to despoil. Perhaps plastic is under the deep red sands of Mars or under the Moon's cratered face? Is there no way on Earth to avoid the curse of plastic waste? Is the 'Plastics Lobby' akin to the Pro-Gun lobby? A pistol in every pocket, PVC in every sea? 1

traficonte Earth Yesterday It would be extremely useful to see some pictures of these mid-ocean plastic faux land masses.

andy b mt.sinai ny Yesterday I so hope that this column this will serve as a wake up call. But we've heard these calls... for decades. I remember it in the 70's etc. We need to understand that this and other issues, like global warming, food deprivation.. anyone for eating bugs ( ? ) , derive from over the over popularization of the planet. There is only one issue here and we must address it, albeit with gentleness and understanding.

Optimist New York Yesterday Yes, the garbage in the seas is a problem. Some people are working to change things https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-ocean-cleanup-feasibility-study.

Bob Garcia Miami Yesterday The article describes another way in which humans are causing the Sixth Great Extinction. It isn't going to stop for two reasons: 1. Humans as a species are not wired to care. Individuals care, but not at the level of nations. 2. We have grossly overpopulated the planet and our numbers continue to explode. 2

Prometheus NJ Yesterday . “…the principal and indeed the only thing that is wrong with the world is man.” C.G. Jung 1

Ann Haase North Oaks, Minnesota Yesterday I am often dumbfounded as I fill up one of my many fabric / reusable grocery bags while watching the people around me blithely tear off endless plastic bags for their groceries. Reusing and Recycling are time - consuming BOTHERS!, but arguably needed until we we find a solution to replacing the plastic bags. Is the solution to the/a Pacific Gyre issue a corporate decision? A governments' decision? A personal decision? Does the solution only come from science? Will one day the undeveloped nations rise up in fury at the affluent nations' degradation of the oceans? ...and why, in heaven's name, do we not REFILL at least our windshield cleaning-fluid containers? When and where do we begin to address these plastics issues?

nssanes Honolulu Yesterday I wonder if some kind of recreational 'cruise' might allow the adventurous and ecologically minded among us to feel good about ourselves by doing a couple of weeks of clean up a year on expeditions. Oh, I know, that kind of thinking is bashed by those who argue there's no point in cleaning up until the production of trash is addressed - but cleaning up is a separate matter that requires an artisanal approach. Those gyres of trash need to be picked up 'by hand' the same way as invasive plants must be weeded, and why not equip volunteers to do it? 2

Jay Massachusetts Yesterday act locally - DON'T BUY WATER IN PLASTIC CONTAINERS - use tap water.

Connie Moffit Seattle Yesterday Some people have asked for pictures of ocean plastics. Here are some impressive ones by Chris Jordan on the effect of plastic on the birds of Midway. http://www.chrisjordan.com/gallery/midway/#CF000313%2018x24 2

newreview Santa Barbara, CA Yesterday Geez, was it only 45 years ago that the first call went out for doing something about the plastic in the ocean? It obviously went unheeded and now it's too late...... 1

FreeSpirit Annandale Va Yesterday 'There is nothing new under the sun' Proverbs

hysterium Pequosette Yesterday Many commenters have tried to address solutions to the manufacture and use of plastics. One possible stopgap solution to the ocean pollution might be to make an economic incentive to reduce the present 'islands'. If a superfund was established to pay the fishing industry to harvest the plastic and deliver it to a dedicated site(s), then some of the dwindling fishing industry might shift into trash harvesters. This would only be viable for the larger trash, not particulates, but at least part of the problem would be reduced. How to handle the materials once collected. . that's another problem. 1

Bohemienne Midwest Yesterday As long as the human population keeps growing at its current pace, we're doomed to trash this poor planet no matter what regulatory or other efforts are made. Imagine the vast sigh of relief from other species (what will be left of them) when the last human being finally dies off? And can you blame them?

KJP San Luis Obispo, Ca. Yesterday As bad as Soylent Green was, it still has lessons for us that are becoming more relevant every year. We need to spend whatever it takes to collect much of this garbage before it is to late. Whether there is more or less than the scientists thought is not the relevant point. If it is killing huge amounts of sea life that is reason enough to collect it. We are supposed to be the stewards of the planet and we are not doing a good job. 1

Acajohn Chicago Yesterday Americans use 500,000,000 plastic straws EVERY DAY. Tell your server you want NO STRAW. Immediate, measurable positive effect. 2

linh ny Yesterday we use crowley milk etc, and have even switched grocery stores to one which carries it. now they've switched from reliable paper cartons to plastic - we've written them asking they change back as not only do we not have any idea where a non-redeemable plastic milk bottle ends up, the stuff spoils faster....

NYT Pick Chris Chicago, IL Yesterday This points to something that, in our (justified) frenzy to attract attention to global climate change, we so often miss: that there are tangible things that we are environmentally responsible for that we can also fix. The huge amounts of plastic in the oceans are not the result of possible 'natural planetary cycles,' and I think the mass media sometimes loses the trees for the forest (to invert the classic phrase) when putting so much emphasis on the impeding environmental calamities from rising temperatures and changing weather systems. These also need to be addressed, but I do not think that global disaster should be the only incentive to be a good environmental steward. It is easy to forget that one of the 3 R's of conservation is 'reduce.' Until we as consumers demonstrate that we will not buy tons and tons of cheap plastic, companies will continue to produce them and our inborn shortsightedness as humans will continue to exacerbate the problem. Or our world governments could pass regulations making plastics less desirable to produce, but now I'm dreaming. 38

Christine Northern Virginia Yesterday .Agree. The industry sends the message that recyclable plastic is 'okay to throw away'. Consumers 'feel good' tossing their plastics in a bin that is then hauled away to that big recycling plant that recycles our plastic into other consumable goods. Out of sight - out of mind. But the dirty secret is very little plastic gets recycled because it's cheaper to dispose of it in our dumps. Reduce, Reuse, and Toss as the last resort

Helen Wheels Portland, OR Yesterday I'm not an expert on fishing gear used in the past, but I've read that fishermen used to use hemp for their ropes and nets. Hemp, a natural, biodegradable product. Fishermen repaired their nets and ropes as needed. If any got lost in the ocean, they would degrade naturally. I don't know how the marine life fared, if they got entangled in the nets as they do in these horrible mile-long plastic nets used now, but I wonder if making the fishing industries to go back to hemp or other natural materials for fishing would solve part of the problem. 2

Mike S. Monterey, CA Yesterday As I understand it, in Germany, you take the packaging from what you buy back to the store where you bought it. That would move a lot of plastic back from being dispersed to our homes and make it more economical for someone to process it back to petroleum or something else useful. 2

PE Seattle, Wash. Yesterday The way we consume things needs to be changed. Switch from plastic bottles to reusable containers for water, milk, soft drinks, hard drinks bought at grocery stores. Everyone should carry a thermos. Obama should use executive Order to mandate all coastal states to adopt the drain blockage policies that work in California. This will protect our oceans and create jobs. 1

Snarky Marky Los Angeles Yesterday This ban on plastic bags is just crazy. I live here in LA and yes, there is a lot of bag waste - but it pales in comparison to the amount of plastic that wraps everything we buy. And the amount of hard plastics (so items can't be tampered with) just astounds me. Seems that there should be less individual plastic wrapping on items that really don't need it or use of materials that can recycled. 1

ella biondi New York, NY Yesterday Why can't the nations that are really threatened by this issue, USA, China, Norway whomever outfit a few old boats with garbage crusher capacity and get out there and start cleaning? Of course, we need to change our habits and recycle etc. But we certainly could spend some money on cleanup.

John New York Yesterday Eventually the planet will find some use for all this trash. At the present time it is developing new organisms to deal with plastic and other offenses. if we could only do something about the parasites making it all. We continue to overwhelm our host.

Rudolf New York Yesterday For the past 30 years we have been barking up the wrong tree by constantly focusing on climate change as the real manmade pollutant of nature. We were just plain naïve and mislead by people like Al Gore. Instead we should have focused on plastic garbage. Too late now.

Susan Anderson is a trusted commenter Boston Yesterday Over the years, we have ceded autonomy to marketers. With every 'free' option or 'convenient' new product we encourage advertisers to set the terms of the minutes and days or our lives. Our whole model for living is based on consumption, and with all-pervasive media we are ceding our minds to exploitation of our planetary home. 'in the end, the real challenge is to combat an economic model that thrives on wasteful products and packaging' is part of the truth, but this is just one aspect of a bigger problem. We separate the way we live from the hard reality that we live on a finite planet. This kind of pollution is terrible, but so are all the others. It doesn't matter which problem is worse, what matters is that we, the family of humankind, have abdicated the freedom to know and to think in favor of things and entertainment. We use our atmosphere our land, and our water as a dump, and turn away from the evidence to serve ideas about how to live that are increasingly two-dimensional and passive. This is not freedom, it is slavery. I don't think most of us meant any harm by it, but we have let marketing become the engine that drives the machinery of living without noticing that our integrity and vitality are taking body blows. Time is not on our side any more. The life of the mind provides wealth beyond imagining, unlike the things we've been persuaded we want. 11

Mark Thomason is a trusted commenter Clawson, MI Yesterday The author is correct to point out the problem of all the plastic found in the oceans. Also of importance is all the plastic NOT found in the oceans. It was there, and it isn't to be found now. It isn't biodegradable. Where did it go? Much of the plastic that went into the oceans has broken up into fine particles. Some is still suspended in the top layers of water. Those suspended small particles interfere with marine life. Some are eaten, which doesn't change them, but moves them and does not good to whatever eats them. Some crowd out the one-celled life that is the broad bottom of the food chain. Some becomes a layer of heavier or encapsulated particles on the bottom. That interferes with bottom life in the same ways as particles in the upper water. Finally, we are discovering there are some single cell life forms that DO eat petroleum from seeps in the ocean bottom, and could be eating oil spills and some plastics too. This too distorts the oceans' life, because it feeds blooms of creatures, shifting the balance opf life against what would otherwise be there. The visible floating big stuff is only the visible part of the problem, maybe unsightly but not the most important long impact. 16

Bryan Kentucky Yesterday Not to worry, Mark. Three lobbyists for the plastics industry have responded below and they're on the case! Comprehensive solutions from innovative partnering are just around the corner. Oh, and Thank You For Smoking. 1

Tim B is a trusted commenter Seattle Yesterday It is startling to consider that ours is the only species that is smart enough, and dumb enough, to produce endless amounts of waste, whether it be pollutants like plastic, oil spills, toxic chemicals, carbon dioxide or unrecycled human waste. I remember growing up in the 50s and it was considered 'trashy' to just throw things out the car window or leave litter in the neighborhood. We are so enamored of our 'consumer' and throw away society. And burgeoning human populations which somehow aspire to 'western' standards of living are surely going to make these problems worse. My hope is that over the coming decades with growing awareness and shrinking resources, that many of us will elect to have fewer or no children and aspire to a much less transitory, simple and satisfying life style. One thing for certain, this over-consumption and endless waste cycle cannot last forever. This video shows clearly the devastating effects of having plastic in the oceans and the birds of Midway Island .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAL9Xvrg3hI 49

Mandeep U.S.A. Yesterday Hi Tim, Thank you for your comments. I agree with you especially with regard to producing children. I, too, grew up in the 50s and have the same recollections as you. Mandeep 1

Nora01 New England Yesterday Capitalism both creates and thrives on waste, which is why nothing of value is made any longer. The gig was up when the capitalists hit on 'planned obsolescence' from there, disposable everything was a very short hop. 2

SEE ALL REPLIES NYT Pick Look Ahead is a trusted commenter WA Yesterday Don't under-estimate the ability of the plastic lobby to organize opposition to plastic reduction programs. In our community, a new law eliminated retail plastic bags. Retailers provide small paper bags for free and large ones for a nominal price but shoppers quickly learned to bring their own sturdier, easier to carry reusable bags. Then someone with too much time in his hands and money from who knows where organized a repeal effort, paying for signatures to get it on the ballot. The repeal was defeated in the election. Mixed curbside recycling is another major effort. If you make it easy enough and have enough re-use demand, everyone wins, except the virgin plastics producers. 92

Nora01 New England Yesterday Recycling is a no-brainer. It should be required by law. Actually, use it up, repurpose, and recycle should be done by everyone. We all have to share this planet and its limited resources. No matter whether you can 'afford' it, the earth can't. Ireland banned plastic bags several years ago and now people caught without their own durable bags are frowned on.

HKGuy New York City Yesterday I've been going to Fire Island for 30 years. Back then, the beach was pristine and the ocean was full of life. Now the beach is littered with everything except the shed shells of hermit crabs, and the ocean is dead. 45

CW Seattle Yesterday I'd hate to inject any facts in a discussion about how we're all going to die, but here goes. There's actually a lot less plastic in the oceans than researchers had expected, according to a study published a couple months ago in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (Google -- 'national academy of sciences' proceedings 'andres cozar') And disposable plastic grocery bags were judged the most environmentally friendly on eight of nine parameters, in a 2011 study by the U.K.'s. Environment Agency. (Google -- 'life cycle assessment of supermarket carrier bags') 10

Diego Los Angeles Yesterday 'There's actually a lot less plastic in the oceans than researchers had expected' So in your world if you expected your house to burn down in five minutes and it in fact took ten minutes, you'd feel just fine? 1

Bill Appledorf is a trusted commenter British Columbia Yesterday CW: I assume you are familiar with this video: http://vimeo.com/25563376 1

SEE ALL REPLIES iggi Germany Yesterday I would say Indonesia is to be majorly blamed for this; on our way to Kupang with Kapal Pelni we saw their daily trash dump; just like that: all sorts of plastic, into the ocean. Who would now 'dare' calling up the new Indonesian president? excess of jurisdiction... Nadie sabe nada, eh? 35

Catbird Wisconsin Yesterday Call him up. Jokowi is not business as usual. Not when that means Jakarta flooding roof-deep because it's paved all the way to Bogor and the rivers are dammed with trash. Hold the Mayor of his country responsible, and maybe something will change. You can say: Kalau kita tak berani melestarikan alam, siapa? Kalau belum, kapan? (If we don't save our land, who will? If not now, then when?) 1

srwdm Boston Yesterday We need to return to more re-usable GLASS containers—for milk, for instance. 79

Annie Pittsburgh Yesterday While I much prefer my beverages in glass bottles, we also need to consider that glass is far heavier than plastic, thus increasing the use of fossil fuels for transport. And glass containers are often a source of pollution themselves, when they are broken and the fragments left on the street or in waterways. Unfortunately, as the world's population booms and increases world-wide in the standard of living take place, we're going to find ourselves caught between a rock and a hard place. It's frightening to think about how we're going to deal with all of these issues when so many of us are involved.

CW Seattle Yesterday You do realize, of course, that glass takes far more energy to make, and to transport? You know, that global warming thing you people are always rattling on about? 1

SEE ALL REPLIES getinvolved Los Angeles Yesterday Recycling and trying to slow down the use of plastics is fine but slowing down population growth should be the long term goal. Flag166

Share this comment on FacebookShare this comment on Twitter CK Rye Yesterday Bingo, and for more reasons than plastic waste. However capitalists can only sell to people, and more people cheapens labor, they realize that, so population control is verboten.

wgeiser Houston Yesterday I am still waiting for someone to write an opinion piece about population growth and our eventual demise. If we do not stop population growth or lower our population, there is no way we can fix any of the environmental problems that we face today or in the future. Anthropomorphic climate change cannot be slowed,or stopped until our population stabilizes or goes down. More people means more energy needed, more resources taken and more food required. Sooner or later something will crash and then, we will crash too! Flag2

Share this comment on FacebookShare this comment on Twitter Sharon, Brooklyn Heights Brookyn Heights, NY Yesterday Just keep using plastic. You could slow population growth to zero in no time at all. Flag2

Share this comment on FacebookShare this comment on Twitter Gene Thompson Oklahoma City, OK Yesterday Plastic is a problem solved when population growth stops, diminishes, and returns to the levels of the 20th century. This is inevitable. The human population is unsustainable at 7 billion people. I personally volunteer not to have children. None. Zero. That's the biggest contribution anyone can make to reducing pollution and reducing population. GeneThompson@aya.yale.edu www.gtvnn.net Flag1

Share this comment on FacebookShare this comment on Twitter LanaiBoy Honolulu, HI Yesterday Why should we slow down population growth? Don't you know that the population is going down in most of Europe, the Americas, and Asia? Some predict a demographic winter for Europe, Central Europe, and especially Russia. Russia is losing about 700,000 people a year according to Vladimir Putin and it and many other countries have cash and other incentives for their people giving birth. It is true that the global population is projected to grow from about about 7 billion today to between 9 to 10 billion by 2050. However, the countries that are increasing population are primarily in Africa and population control measures should be directed there. The UN population projections, which goes up to the year 2300, show a dramatic slowdown in fertility rates in the coming centuries. This is a trend that started in the last mid-century. For example, global birth rates fell from 6 babies to 2.9 in 2005. The replacement rate is 2.1. Today 44 of the most developed countries have below replacement fertility rates. The UN predicts that by 2050, 75 percent of less developed countries will have fertility rates below below replacement rates. Countries such as Japan, Italy, Spain, Germany, Russia and many of the former USSR client states already have below 1.3 fertility rates which is unprecedented in history. We are lucky in America because we have one of the highest fertility rates of all advanced countries. However, even ours fell to 1.9 during the prolonged recession of the past years.

r a Toronto Yesterday What?! That is insane! No, no, no - we can manage - we've got sideways drilling for oil; electric cars for global warming (which is probably overrated by climate alarmists anyway), fish-farms to make up for overenthusisam in pursuing the wild catch; desalination plants to replace drained aquifers; filters on our drains to catch errant plastics; we'll probably be lassooing asteroids for the metal soon and raising insects for protein - it's all under control. Onwards to 20 billion.

Mandeep U.S.A. Yesterday I totally agree. Reproducing is the main problem. Flag1

Frank Language New York, NY Yesterday Imagine the lobby against that! Fewer humans means fewer people to sell junk to and fewer plastic bags to carry it around in!

READ MORE 432 COMMENTS Readers shared their thoughts on this article.The comments section is closed. To send a letter to the editor, write to letters@nytimes.com. All 432 Readers’ Picks 242 NYT Picks 15 Newest More on nytimes.com More in OpinionGo to the Opinion Section » OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR How the Supreme Court Protects Bad Cops EDITORIAL The Governor’s Primary in New York The Times will not make an endorsement in the Democratic primary for governor because Andrew Cuomo failed to keep... MAUREEN DOWD He Has a Dream President Obama, who once boldly and candidly addressed race, has outsourced the issue to the Rev. Al Sharpton. Top NewsGo to the Home Page » Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty U.S. Mobilizes Allies to Widen Assault on ISIS American Fighting for ISIS Is Killed in Syria

International New York Times © 2014 The New York Times Company HomeSearchContact UsWork With UsAdvertiseYour Ad ChoicesPrivacyTerms of ServiceTerms of Sale