ASSIGNMENT 2: SUMMARY READER RESPONSE: OCEAN CLEANUP MACHINE FINAL DRAFT[Edited1]
In the article, “Boy Genius Boyan Slat’s Giant Ocean Cleanup Machine Is Real,” Schiller(2017) explores the potential of Boyan Slats’ recent innovation. Slat claims to radically improve the condition of the Pacific Garbage Patch and projects to remove 50% of the plastic waste within the next five years. The article mentions Slat’s design functioning as an “artificial coastline” utilizing current to gather and entrap waste for convenient disposal. With the prototype for his former design failing due to the brutal ocean conditions, Slat was able to learn from and improve his device. The new model replaces the use of foundations with anchors situated in the deep-sea layer to slow down the boom and facilitate entrapment. Slat claims that the revised system will be more robust, affordable, and scalable. He also envisages collected debris to weigh in the “tens of thousands of tons” every year. In a bid to substantiate his colossal claims for trash removal, Slat has purportedly done extensive simulations on the interaction of marine devices and trash in their natural environment.
The article by Schiller mentions the commendable effort by Slat to improve the existing device efficiency. However, in a review of other materials related to Slat's ocean cleanup, it becomes clear that Schiller failed to mention the disadvantages that are prevalent in Slat's design.
According to the United Nations Environment Programme(n.d.), an estimated 8 million tons of plastic waste ends up in the oceans every year, with ten identified rivers spewing out more than 90% of the plastic waste. These values exceed the projected waste removal for Slat's device by 800% annually.
Additionally, Gabetti (as cited in Fairs, 2019) highlighted the difficulty for Slat's system in transporting a large amount of plastic waste from the middle of the ocean back to shore.
These issues could have been avoided if the device to collect and trap debris was placed at the rivers.
These values highlight the inadequacy of Slat's system to effectively combat the magnitude of plastic waste entering the sea and hints at the possibility of Slat failing to investigate the factors attributed to oceanic pollution before his endeavour. In my opinion, the outflow of plastic waste from the ten rivers should be classified as the root cause of oceanic plastic waste pollution, and Slat could have developed a cheaper and more effective solution to combat the plastic waste by focusing on a device that traps debris coming away from the rivers in a concentrated area than a device to collect waste out in the deep sea dispersed across large areas.
According to the United Nations Environment Programme(n.d.), an estimated 8 million tons of plastic waste ends up in the oceans every year, with ten identified rivers spewing out more than 90% of the plastic waste. These values exceed the projected waste removal for Slat's device by 800% annually.
Additionally, Gabetti (as cited in Fairs, 2019) highlighted the difficulty for Slat's system in transporting a large amount of plastic waste from the middle of the ocean back to shore.
These issues could have been avoided if the device to collect and trap debris was placed at the rivers.
These values highlight the inadequacy of Slat's system to effectively combat the magnitude of plastic waste entering the sea and hints at the possibility of Slat failing to investigate the factors attributed to oceanic pollution before his endeavour. In my opinion, the outflow of plastic waste from the ten rivers should be classified as the root cause of oceanic plastic waste pollution, and Slat could have developed a cheaper and more effective solution to combat the plastic waste by focusing on a device that traps debris coming away from the rivers in a concentrated area than a device to collect waste out in the deep sea dispersed across large areas.
Secondly, Slat may have failed to consider the damage that plastic waste could do to marine ecosystems while travelling from the rivers to the Pacific Garbage Patch. Kratochwill(2016) mentions how oceanographer Sebille concluded that plastic waste could float in the sea for up to 50 years before finally reaching the Garbage Patch. With that in mind, the 8 million tons of plastic waste that went unaddressed by Slat’s system has the opportunity to wreck marine ecosystems before eventually being noticed. On top of that, Fox(2010) reports that some of the everyday items usually found in oceanic plastic waste will break down to microplastics in less than 50 years. Due to Slat’s oversight in identifying and containing the plastic waste at its source, we can expect to see a rise in the volume of microplastics in the ocean, further exacerbating the situation.
Lastly, Slat could have utilized a better design thinking framework to ensure the feasibility of his endeavour. The article “System 001 learnings - Root causes summarized”(2019) highlights the inability of Slat’s system to retain plastic waste and the subsequent failure of his device four months later during its operation in the open sea. Despite having completed “hundreds of model tests and a series of nearshore prototypes”, Slat was unable to develop a functioning system to remove plastic waste from the ocean. In my opinion, Slat could have avoided this if he started with a robust design thinking framework. More specifically, an intensive framework for identifying the contributing factors to the pollution out at sea, which in turns contribute to the development of an effective solution to the problem. This framework would have helped Slat realize the inadequacy of his proposed solution to combat oceanic plastic waste, thereby preventing the wastage of resources on an unrealistic endeavour.
Although Slat was ultimately able to correct the mechanical problems plaguing his initial design, he fails to address the plastic waste pollution in the ocean logically and effectively. His glaring oversight in identifying and addressing these evident issues hints at the possibility of his project being an avenue to seek self-glorification rather than a genuine attempt to save the ocean.
Reference:
Fox, C. (2010). Trash Travels: From Our Hands to the Sea, Around the Globe, and Through Time.
Retrieved February 9, 2020 from Ocean Conservancy:
https://oceanconservancy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/2010-Ocean-Conservancy-ICC-Report.pdf
Mr. Trash Wheel. (n.d.) Home.
Retrieved February 9, 2020 from
https://www.mrtrashwheel.com/
Schiller, B. (2011). Boy Genius Boyan Slat’s Giant Ocean Clean up Machine is Real.
Fast Company.
Retrieved January 30, 2020 from
https://www.fastcompany.com/40419899/boy-genius-boyan-slats-giant-ocean-cleanup-machine-is-real
The Ocean Cleanup. (2019). System 001 Learnings - Root Causes Summarized: Updates.
Retrieved February 9, 2020 from
https://theoceancleanup.com/updates/system-001-learnings-root-causes-summarized/
Kratochwill, L. (2016). Too good to be true? The Ocean Cleanup Project faces feasibility questions
theguardian.com
Retrieved February 9, 2020 from
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/26/ocean-cleanup-project-environment-pollution-boyan-slat
UN Environment. (n.d.). Our planet is drowning in plastic pollution. This World Environment Day, it’s time for a change.
Retrieved February 9, 2020 from
https://www.unenvironment.org/interactive/beat-plastic-pollution/
Venema, V. (2014). The Dutch boy mopping up a sea of plastic.
BBC.com
Retrieved February 9, 2020 from
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29631332
Edited 07/03/20.
Edited 13/03/20.
Comments
Post a Comment