Ganjian E., Khorami M., Maghsoudi A.A (2007). Scrap-tyre-rubber replacement for aggregate and filler in concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Volume 23 (2009), Pages 1828–1836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.09.020

The article written by Ganjian, Khorami and Maghsoudi from the Civil Engineering Department at the Bahonar University of Kerman in 2007, is a study that examines the feasibility of cement replacement by scrap-tyre powder and the contrast of aggregate replacement by tyre crumbs in concrete. It was reported that the result of global growth and demand in the automobile industry has boosted the tyre production and caused immense stockpiles of used tyres being generated. Since scrap tyre is nondegradable at ambient conditions and produces environmental mal-effects, the article aims to incorporate them into concrete to evaluate its behaviour and promote a sustainable way of reducing landfilling and saving virgin materials used in concrete production.

In the experiment conducted, 3 mixtures containing various proportions were made using chipped rubber to replace coarse aggregates, tyre powder to replace cement in concrete and a control mixture with no implementation of rubber. The objective was to analyse the specimens based on various parameters to understand the interaction of rubber particles with other components as compared to aggregates. Through mechanical and durability tests done according to respective standards, the authors concluded that the performance of the concrete decreased as rubber replacement increased. These include parameters such as compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, tensile strength, flexural strength, water permeability and water absorption. Besides the main factor of change being the differing properties of rubber particles and aggregates, the article also discussed the experimental observations and variables that resulted in it.  With the findings, the article supports the intensive research conducted on the properties that showcased the size, proportion, and surface texture of rubber particles affect the strength of used tyre rubber contained in concrete.

In the article, “Boy Genius Boyan Slat’s Giant Ocean Cleanup Machine Is Real”, Schiller (2017) described about the events that led to the conception and evolution of Boyan Slat’s Ocean Cleanup Machine design, which would start to help rid the ocean of tens of thousands of plastic garbage yearly from 2018. The author reported that the Patch had been covered in plastic debris since 1997, and the build-up had worsened since then; thus, it inspired Slat to clean the ocean. His design involved a large boom rooted to the seabed and would use the Pacific’s current to gather the trash into the centre, which would then be cleared up by “ocean garbage truck”. However, the project faced positive and negative reactions for its large scale concerning its resources and prospects. With all the hype generated by the initiative, Slat had modified his design to be more cost effective and efficient. Through research and development, the improved system consisted of a large anchor to suspend the boom in “deep-water layer” and had scaled to contain 50 devices of 0.6 miles each. Therefore, the system would not require excavating the seabed, and it ensured the continuity of the system even when one device ceased to function.

Overall, the article did address the ongoing development of the machine and the creator’s expectation of it. However, it has failed to convince the reader on the design’s efficiency and explain its interaction and impact on marine lives.

Firstly, the article did not state the machine’s capabilities and limitations precisely. Apart from emphasising that the device would clean up as much as 50% of the total debris within five years, the article missed out the fact that the machine would only be able to pick up the garbage of a centimetre or larger in size or at 3-metres deep. Removing the larger plastics would solve the entanglement issue for the aquatic wildlife and achieve an aesthetic ocean view. However, the article did not address the presence of microplastic, which would cause toxic effects on creatures when ingested and that it may indirectly affect human life when those creatures are fished and eaten by consumers. This point has been elaborated in the article, “Great Pacific Garbage Patch: Experts Unsure If Ocean Cleanup Is Going To Rid The Seas Of Plastic ” by, Yang (2018). Without addressing the incapability of the system, it would mislead readers into thinking that the machine would be foolproof and a successful solution to the current problem.

Also, the article overlooked the environmental impact caused by design. It is a known fact that with the implementation of such a large-scale system in the home of the aquatic wildlife, there is bound to be a disruption to nature. This point was explained in the article, “A Massive Plastic Cleanup Project Provokes Hope and Scepticism” by Stein (2018). The article emphasised that the device would become a “fish-attracting device” where small fishes would be attracted to the accumulation of algae on the device, which would bait larger fishes to the area. With the increases of fishes in the area, it would increase the rate of fishing since the system is unable to differentiate between the garbage and the sea creatures, and would result in the possibility of entanglement within the debris and the “ghost nets”. Without addressing the entanglement concern imposing a threat to sea creatures including endangered sea turtles, it would mislead readers into assuming that the foundation has not implemented measures to protect wildlife.

In conclusion, the project is a great initiative to clear up garbage accumulated over the years. However, the article should not omit the stated points as it showed the system’s limitations and aftermath impacts due to the promising implementation. Thus, it does not convince the reader on the design’s efficiency and explain its interaction with marine lives. Ultimately, in my opinion, prevention is better than cure, and so the initiative will be more successful if there are measures taken at the root causes which is to educate the public and factories and reinforce the need to dispose of waste properly.

References

Schiller, B. (2017, November 05) Boy Genius Boyan Slat’s Giant Ocean Cleanup Machine Is Real. Fast Company. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.fastcompany.com/40419899/boy-genius-boyan-slats-giant-ocean-cleanup-machine-is-real

Stein, V. (2018, October 05). A massive plastic cleanup project provokes hope and scepticism. PBSO News Hour. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/a-massive-plastic-cleanup-project-provokes-hope-and-skepticism

Yang, E (2018, September 23). Great Pacific Garbage Patch: Experts unsure if Ocean Cleanup is going to rid the seas of plastic. ABC News. Retrieved, February 05, 2019 from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-23/ocean-cleanup-great-pacific-garbage-patch-plastics/10285938

Last Update: 08th April 2019

In the article, “Boy Genius Boyan Slat’s Giant Ocean Cleanup Machine Is Real”, Schiller (2017) mentioned about the events that lead to the conception and evolution of Boyan Slat’s Ocean Cleanup Machine design, which will start to help rid the ocean of tens of thousands of plastic garbage yearly from 2018. The author reported that the Patch was covered in plastic debris since 1997, and the build-up has worsened since then; thus, it inspired Slat to clean the ocean. His design involves a large boom rooted to the seabed and uses the Pacific’s current to gather the trash into the centre which would then be cleared up by “ocean garbage truck”. However, the project faced different reactions for its large scale concerning its resources and prospects. With all the hype generated by the initiative, Slat has modified his design to be more cost effective and efficient. Through research and development, the improved system consists of a large anchor to suspend the boom in “deep-water layer” and is scaled to contain 50 devices of 0.6 miles each. Therefore, the system does not require excavating the seabed, and it ensures the continuity of the system even when one device ceases to function.

Overall, the article did address the ongoing development of the machine and the creator’s expectation of it. However, it has failed to convince the reader on the design’s efficiency and address its interaction and impact on the marine lives.

Firstly, the article did not state the machine’s capabilities and limitations precisely. Apart from emphasising that the device will clean up as much as 50% of the total debris within five years, it missed out the fact that the machine is only able to pick up the garbage of a centimetre or larger in size or at 3-metres deep.  By removing the larger plastics, it will solve the entanglement issue for the aquatic wildlife and achieve an aesthetic ocean view. However, it does not address the presence of microplastic which causes toxic effects on creatures when ingested and it may indirectly affect human life by fishing and eating the affected fishers. This point is further supported in the article, “I asked 15 ocean plastic pollution experts about the Ocean Cleanup project, and they have concerns” (Shiffman, 2018). Hence, it showed a loophole in the system that may have unknowingly mislead readers into thinking that the machine is 100% foolproof.

Lastly, the article overlooked the environmental impact caused by the design. It is a known fact that with the implementation of such a large-scale system in the home of the aquatic wildlife, there’s bound to be a disruption to nature. In the article, “A massive plastic cleanup project provokes hope and scepticism” (Stein, 2018), it was emphasised that the device would become a “fish-attracting device” whereby small fishes will be attracted to the accumulation of algae on the device, which will bait larger fishes to the area. With the increased of fishes in the area, it will increase the rate of fishing since the system is unable to differentiate between garbage and them. Thus, it results in the possibility of entanglement within the debris and the “ghost nets”. Hence, it is a pressing concern that will cause public uproar if the foundation does not implement any measures to protect the creatures.

Although the project is a great initiative to clear up garbage accumulated over the years, it is not the best solution considering the number of resources used in its development which can alternatively be achieved by clearing the debris that washed up onshore. Ultimately, prevention is better than cure and so the initiative will be more successful if there is implementation at the root causes which is to educate the public and factories to dispose of waste properly.

Bibliography

Southern Fried Science (2018, June 13). I asked 15 ocean plastic pollution experts about the Ocean Cleanup project, and they have concerns. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from http://www.southernfriedscience.com/i-asked-15-ocean-plastic-pollution-experts-about-the-ocean-cleanup-project-and-they-have-concerns/

PBSO News Hour (2018, October 05). A massive plastic cleanup project provokes hope and scepticism. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/a-massive-plastic-cleanup-project-provokes-hope-and-skepticism

KCET (2015, June 04). 6 Reasons That Floating Ocean Plastic Cleanup Gizmo is a Horrible Idea. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.kcet.org/redefine/6-reasons-that-floating-ocean-plastic-cleanup-gizmo-is-a-horrible-idea

Kinder (2018, August 14). Boyan Slat’s The Ocean Cleanup might not be the saviour we were hoping for. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.kinder-world.org/articles/problems/boyan-slats-the-ocean-cleanup-might-not-be-the-saviour-we-were-hoping-for-19058

In the article, “Boy Genius Boyan Slat’s Giant Ocean Cleanup Machine Is Real”, Schiller (2017) talks about the events that lead to the conception and evolution of Boyan Slat’s Ocean Cleanup Machine design, which will start to help rid the ocean of tens of thousands of plastic garbage yearly from 2018. Since 1997, the Patch was covered in plastic debris, and the build-up has worsened since then; thus, inspiring Slat to clean the ocean. His design involves a large boom rooted to the seabed and uses the Pacific’s current to gather the trash into the centre which will then be cleared up by “ocean garbage truck”. However, the project faced different reactions for its large scale concerning its resources and prospect. With all the hype generated by the initiative, Slat has modified his design to be more cost effective and efficient. Through research and development, the improved system consists of a large anchor to suspend the boom in “deep-water layer” and is scaled to contain 50 devices of 0.6 miles each. Therefore, the system does not require excavating the seabed, and it ensures the continuity of the system even when one device ceases to function. Overall, the article did address the ongoing development of the machine and the creator’s expectation of it. However, it has failed to convince the reader on the design’s efficiency and its interaction and impact on the marine lives.

The article did not state the machine’s capabilities and limitations precisely. Apart from emphasising that the device will clean up as much as 50% of the total debris within five years, it missed out the fact that the machine is only able to pick up the garbage of a centimetre or larger in size or at 3-metres deep.  By removing the larger plastics, it will solve the entanglement issue for the aquatic wildlife and aesthetically. However, it does not address the presence of microplastic which causes toxic effects on creatures when ingested and it may indirectly affect human life by fishing and eating the affected fishers. This point is further supported in the article, “I asked 15 ocean plastic pollution experts about the Ocean Cleanup project, and they have concerns”, Shiffman (2018).

Also, the article overlooked the environmental impact caused by the design. It is a known fact that with the implementation of such large-scale system in the home of the aquatic wildlife, there’s bound to be a disruption to nature. In the article, “A massive plastic cleanup project provokes hope and scepticism”, Stein (2018), it was emphasised that the device would become a “fish-attracting device” whereby small fishes will be attracted to the accumulation of algae on the device, which will bait larger fishes to the area. With the increased of fishes in the area, it will increase the rate of fishing since the system is unable to differentiate between garbage and them. Thus, it results in the possibility of entanglement within the debris and the “ghost nets”. Therefore, it is a pressing concern that will cause a public uproar if the foundation does not implement any measures to protect the creatures.

Although the project is a great initiative to clear up garbage accumulated over the years, it is not the best solution considering the number of resources used in its development which can alternatively be achieved by clearing the debris that washed up onshore. Since prevention is better than cure, it is a better option to start from the root causes which is to educate the public and factories to dispose of waste properly.

(589 Words)

Bibliography

Southern Fried Science (2018, June 13). I asked 15 ocean plastic pollution experts about the Ocean Cleanup project, and they have concerns. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from http://www.southernfriedscience.com/i-asked-15-ocean-plastic-pollution-experts-about-the-ocean-cleanup-project-and-they-have-concerns/

PBSO News Hour (2018, October 05). A massive plastic cleanup project provokes hope and scepticism. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/a-massive-plastic-cleanup-project-provokes-hope-and-skepticism

KCET (2015, June 04). 6 Reasons That Floating Ocean Plastic Cleanup Gizmo is a Horrible Idea. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.kcet.org/redefine/6-reasons-that-floating-ocean-plastic-cleanup-gizmo-is-a-horrible-idea

Kinder (2018, August 14). Boyan Slat’s The Ocean Cleanup might not be the saviour we were hoping for. Retrieved, February 05, 2019, from https://www.kinder-world.org/articles/problems/boyan-slats-the-ocean-cleanup-might-not-be-the-saviour-we-were-hoping-for-19058