sailFar.net

as you continue on the rations get used.the tin cans end up on the bottom.but on the way home the 5 gallon sparkletts bottles were emptied never to be refilled again....so overboard they went.wait...heres an idea.....I used the navigational vp-os plotting sheets with indelible markers to write messages....you know the who, what ,when, where ,(and some still wonder why)that was on the way home in 1985,then again in 1990.I sealed the bottles with sealant and duct tape....these bottles are either washed up on some coral atoll,or still afloat  either way they are probably encrusted with marine sea growth and crazed yellow by the sun,crazed yellow like my mind when I wonder ....where are they now....

I was reading the provisioning thread and started wondering..... If you bring along 90 cans of soup and 100 cans of fruit, I can't imagine anyone lets the open cans lie around on a small boat collecting flies.

Do you tie them on behind the boat like a wedding procession car might?   :D

As with almost any answer: It Depends. :D

In coastal waters, food-y trash goes into the water, paper, plastic, and other stuff that doesn't decay quickly gets toted to a receptacle at the next port. In saltwater, I crush and sink cans. In the short time before they corrode away, they'll provide habitat for wee small critters.

Far out, trash swims with the fishies right away, if it is biodegradable.

Things like 6-pack rings and plastic bags, stuff that marine wildlife might eat or get hurt by, get chopped real fine before disposal, so they won't be a threat.

One could argue against doing so, saying that plastics won't degrade, but it is my considered opinion that it'll decay back into it's constituent elements far faster out there than it will in a landfill, so it's better to do that than carry it to port.

LOL -- I like the imagery of the cans trailing behind the boat.

What you do with them depends on where you are.

If you are offshore -- really offshore (12 nm is the rule, but I generally wait a full day) -- you can cut the top and bottom off the can and dump it over the side.

Inshore I wash cans out carefully with sea water and crush them flat (again removing top and bottom of the can).

How you dispose of them depends on where you make landfall. Many islands in warmer latitudes simply don't have the infrastructure to responsibly (my opinion, my judgment) dispose of trash. I'd rather dump stuff well offshore than have someone on the other side of dumpster heaving stuff into the surf. In the US it is off course more an issue of finding a dumpster you can use.

I would like to add that even offshore I separate recyclables from other trash. I can't always recycle at landfall, but I don't want to have to pick through garbage to do it.

Foodstuff and other organics go over the side until we are to close to shore, then they are bagged. Glass and metal goes over the side until near shore at which point they are cleaned and bagged. Plastics are always cleaned and bagged; it is illegal (international treaty and convention and most national laws) to dump plastic over the side.

I haven't participated, but I understand that cruisers in the Bahamas often have trash-burning parties on the beach to dispose of trash, including plastics, and bury the ashes rather than use the questionable trash disposing "systems" in the islands.

except for aluminum cans- those things last for YEARS. I've snorkeled in the Keys and found cans on the bottom that may have been 4 or 5 years old- paint gone, but can in perfect shape.

Not so with veggie cans- they rust quickly.

Unless we are anchored in a really pristine spot, we put food scraps overboard. Fish eat a good bit of it, and crabs to the rest.  Inshore EVERYTHING else comes back with us. Offshore bottles get filled and sunk, cans are perforated and sunk. Plastics of any kind STILL comes back with us.

Of course we make efforts to repackage food stuffs, etc before we leave. No sense in carrying un-needed plastic wrappings and containers along unless they are really needed.

In talking with a few long term cruisers, I found that many carried paper, etc ashore on deserted beaches and had a fire periodically- preferable below high tide line so no residue remained.

Trash is a major problem on some small islands -they really have no way of dealing with the accumulation, so if cruising folks carry more ashore, it overburdens the local efforts even more.


And in some areas, for instance Floridas Dry Tortugas you may be away from a good place to dump for several weeks, so at least SOME of it has to go. Or have a good place to store bags of garbage until you get back to Key West. And believe me, THAT can get stinky unless you carefully wash out any containers.

Tough question.

After recently provisioning my boat for the Bahamas, I was AMAZED at the amount of packaging that I would normally take forgranted as a landlubber. After cruisuing down the east coast, I've realized that the best way to manage your trash onboard is to bring as little as possible in the first place! I must have purchased a thousand dollars worth of groceries and it seemed that once I was done removing all of the excess packaging I had two almost equal piles - One of food, the other of garbage!

Cheers,
Sonnie.

It is just to easy to take it to a trash can someplace. I need it about every 3 to 7 days. Never dump overboard.

I can't believe you'd advocate throwing even finely chopped up plastic.  Many marine lifeforms will mistake even small bits of plastic for food, and can die from ingesting indigestible plastic.  Aside from the effects it may have on marine life, it is also against the MARPOL treaty and heavy fines can result.  

Of course, a MARPOL trash disposal placard is only required on boats >26' LOA, so you probably don't have one aboard.
(http://www.boat-ed.com/images/graphics/trash_sign.gif)

Cans, particularly steel "tin" cans, are readily degradable in the ocean.  Aluminum cans are less so.  But, both cans and glass are relatively safe to dispose of overboard, especially if filled with water or broken down.  

Food waste, should generally be thrown overboard.  It generally will be eaten quite readily by birds, fish, etc.  

Quote from: CapnK on December 29, 2007, 11:05:54 AM
As with almost any answer: It Depends. :D

In coastal waters, food-y trash goes into the water, paper, plastic, and other stuff that doesn't decay quickly gets toted to a receptacle at the next port. In saltwater, I crush and sink cans. In the short time before they corrode away, they'll provide habitat for wee small critters.

Far out, trash swims with the fishies right away, if it is biodegradable.

Things like 6-pack rings and plastic bags, stuff that marine wildlife might eat or get hurt by, get chopped real fine before disposal, so they won't be a threat.

One could argue against doing so, saying that plastics won't degrade, but it is my considered opinion that it'll decay back into it's constituent elements far faster out there than it will in a landfill, so it's better to do that than carry it to port.

I always thought that the MARPOL req's applied specifically to ships of:

• 400 tons or more,
• 15 passengers or more,
• 12 meters or more (36' LOA, not 26')

Rereading MARPOL annex V (http://"http://www.imo.org/Environment/mainframe.asp?topic_id=297"), it does not specifically exclude smaller vessels, so I'm guessing that my understanding has been wrong. I didn't think it applied to small cruising vessels, now I am not so sure that that is the case.

To be safe - Guess I'm toting it home from now on. :)

Oh - and fish aren't going to eat just any old bit of plastic just because it's there. Trust me - I've drug a lot of it in front of them, even fish-shaped fish-smelling plastics, *trying* to get them to eat it. ;) It has to be just right for them to go for it. Ask any offshore fisherman, they'll tell you the same.

Fish are a lot smarter than you'd think. ;D

No, MARPOL applies to all sea going vessels... regardless of size.  However, in the USA, only vessels larger than 26' LOA are required to have a MARPOL placard posted.

Quote from: CapnK on December 29, 2007, 02:25:07 PM
Rereading MARPOL annex V (http://"http://www.imo.org/Environment/mainframe.asp?topic_id=297"), it does not specifically exclude smaller vessels, so I'm guessing that my understanding has been wrong. I didn't think it applied to small cruising vessels, now I am not so sure that that is the case.

To be safe - Guess I'm toting it home from now on. :)

THANK YOU!!! Plastic kills in the ocean no mater what size it is!!!!! There was a good size thread on this here.

Quote from: AdriftAtSea link=topic=1346.msg12661#msg12661 date=
I can't believe you'd advocate throwing even finely chopped up plastic.  Many marine lifeforms will mistake even small bits of plastic for food, and can die from ingesting indigestible plastic.  Aside from the effects it may have on marine life, it is also against the MARPOL treaty and heavy fines can result. 

Of course, a MARPOL trash disposal placard is only required on boats >26' LOA, so you probably don't have one aboard.
(http://www.boat-ed.com/images/graphics/trash_sign.gif)

Cans, particularly steel "tin" cans, are readily degradable in the ocean.  Aluminum cans are less so.  But, both cans and glass are relatively safe to dispose of overboard, especially if filled with water or broken down. 

Food waste, should generally be thrown overboard.  It generally will be eaten quite readily by birds, fish, etc. 

Quote from: CapnK link=topic=1346.msg12646#msg12646 date=
As with almost any answer: It Depends. :D

In coastal waters, food-y trash goes into the water, paper, plastic, and other stuff that doesn't decay quickly gets toted to a receptacle at the next port. In saltwater, I crush and sink cans. In the short time before they corrode away, they'll provide habitat for wee small critters.

Far out, trash swims with the fishies right away, if it is biodegradable.

Things like 6-pack rings and plastic bags, stuff that marine wildlife might eat or get hurt by, get chopped real fine before disposal, so they won't be a threat.

One could argue against doing so, saying that plastics won't degrade, but it is my considered opinion that it'll decay back into it's constituent elements far faster out there than it will in a landfill, so it's better to do that than carry it to port.

Any  & all vessels!

let's not forget:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpaSewyddd4

Any time Zen... :)  

Quote from: Zen on December 29, 2007, 05:21:05 PM

THANK YOU!!! Plastic kills in the ocean no mater what size it is!!!!! There was a good size thread on this here.

Quote from: AdriftAtSea link=topic=1346.msg12661#msg12661 date=
I can't believe you'd advocate throwing even finely chopped up plastic.  Many marine lifeforms will mistake even small bits of plastic for food, and can die from ingesting indigestible plastic.  Aside from the effects it may have on marine life, it is also against the MARPOL treaty and heavy fines can result. 

Of course, a MARPOL trash disposal placard is only required on boats >26' LOA, so you probably don't have one aboard.
(http://www.boat-ed.com/images/graphics/trash_sign.gif)

Cans, particularly steel "tin" cans, are readily degradable in the ocean.  Aluminum cans are less so.  But, both cans and glass are relatively safe to dispose of overboard, especially if filled with water or broken down. 

Food waste, should generally be thrown overboard.  It generally will be eaten quite readily by birds, fish, etc. 

Quote from: CapnK link=topic=1346.msg12646#msg12646 date=
As with almost any answer: It Depends. :D

In coastal waters, food-y trash goes into the water, paper, plastic, and other stuff that doesn't decay quickly gets toted to a receptacle at the next port. In saltwater, I crush and sink cans. In the short time before they corrode away, they'll provide habitat for wee small critters.

Far out, trash swims with the fishies right away, if it is biodegradable.

Things like 6-pack rings and plastic bags, stuff that marine wildlife might eat or get hurt by, get chopped real fine before disposal, so they won't be a threat.

One could argue against doing so, saying that plastics won't degrade, but it is my considered opinion that it'll decay back into it's constituent elements far faster out there than it will in a landfill, so it's better to do that than carry it to port.

Good video Zen... grog to you for it. :)

Did you notice the research vessel is a sailboat.. :) It's a big catamaran from what I can see in the video. :)

That was a great video, I'd highly recommend to anyone who sees this thread that you take the 7 minutes needed to see it. I obviously didn't read the earlier thread here that was mentioned. Grog, Zen! Learn something new every day! :)

It's a damned shame, some of what you learn. :( I had no idea there was that much plastic out there, you can bet that I won't be putting any more out there myself. Although on a chart that gyre is probably pretty small compared to all the Pacific, I also know that it'll only get bigger, concurrent with more and more human population increase, all wanting 'modern conveniences'... And sadly I don't expect that to change anytime soon, so it's easy to see that the problem will only get worse...  ::)  :'(

"Ishmael", by Daniel Quinn. It makes me think of that book.

That they are using a hybrid-engined sailboat as their research vessel - it's good to see people *practicing* what they *preach*, that is all too rare. Kudos to them! :)

Here's a link to the blog, great reading:
http://orvalguita.blogspot.com/

PS - Passing the link on, too!

A round of grog mate!  ;D

Sorry CapnK, I didn't mean for anyone to answer me and incriminate themselves! Good to hear that you will bring your plastic home though. I never knew there was a garbage problem in the oceans though so I'm glad I brought this up.

I was just planning my first week long cruise and wondered if it was kosher to toss food overboard, and also wondered if cruisers put trash in a netted bag overboard, or sealed it and kept it onboard, or whatever.

Thanks for all the advice everyone!

Food is pretty much kosher to toss overboard, since the fish, birds, and other sea life will more than likely eat it. :)

According to MARPOL though, inside the three-mile limit, it is illegal.  Three-to-twelve miles off-shore it should be small pieces, an inch in size or smaller.  Past twelve miles... just dump the food overboard... unless you've got swimmers in the water. :) 

I don't think it would be a good idea to attract sharks when you've got people in the water. :)

Thanks for the link to the video. Very disturbing but useful to know. Thank you.

When you are away from harbors or crowded spots you can toss food overboard. It is also kosher to put your dirty dishes overboard in a mesh bag overnight and clean the next day.

Zen, thanks for posting that link.  They are doing some important work, and the more word that gets out on that the better.

What I'm going to post is meant to devalue neither the research nor the message of that clip.  But I would urge a word of caution in how we read it.  Part of my objection arises from a 20 year career as a professional scientist/researcher and the push to be "correct" rather than merely convenient.

With that, I offer the following questions/comments:

• I was quite struck by the visual of the plastic floating in the sample bottle.  But, I have to ask, just how much sea, ie, what volume of water, did they sieve to extract THAT MUCH plastic?  That's a VERY important question, as it goes to 'concentration' of the plastic.  Sure, they present a nice visual, and it was probably calculated for maximum emotional impact, but they conveniently leave out the all important NUMBERS that make something SCIENCE.
• They mention their studies show 6x more plastic than zoo plankton.  WOW, that's big.  That's a global type number.  Huge.  My question is have they shown they don't have a sampling bias in their experimental technique - is there 6x more plastic than plankton in the sea water or is that an artifact of their experiment?
• LIfetime of the plastic in the water.  Kurt is correct - plastics don't last as long in environments where they are exposed to sun light (unlike, say, being buried in a landfill).  Plastics floating on or near the water's surface will have a MUCH lower half life than the (incorrect) conventional wisdom of thousands of years suggests.  Does their research explore this?  What is the time profile of their results?  The same throughout the year, spikes, etc?  Remember, the statistics of a single number are meaningless.
• Back to the 6x more plastic than zoo plankton for a sec.  Is there THAT MUCH plastic, or has there been a reduction of the amount of zoo plankton?  Both?  A relative comparison of one to the other is cute, but does NOTHING to point toward causality.

I bring this up for several reasons.  One, this work has been done by "environmental scientists," and I know from direct experience of both working with some and teaching some, that the rigor of "objective science" in this field is often lacking.  I'm not saying this is so with these guys, and I recognize this is just a clip on YouTube, but for what it is worth...

This Clip on YouTube is NOT science.

It makes a powerful statement; it presents a strong visual and emotional impact.  The point - stop polluting - is just as valid no matter what the answers to my questions are.  But I was trained to look at work like this and ask hard, critical questions because "truth" does matter at some point.

Fair Winds.

I think/thought of those things too, John. We see 'funny science' results all too often these days. We live in the era of the hard sell, I guess. You and I have discussed this many times in the past few years.

That said, what keeps coming back to me is that if there is that much plastic in any part of the ocean that can be dredged up in a mile or two, it's too much.

They report other results in their blog, BTW. A dredge at depth - maybe 30 meters IIRC, basically turned up nothing. Another entry talks of a ball of netting nearly 3' in diameter that would submerge for minutes at the slightest ripple, but come back up slowly after several minutes. Off Los Angeles, after a big rainstorm, they didn't see quite the result they saw in the Gyre. Still, too much.

Ripped from the IMO site:
Time taken for objects to dissolve at sea

• Paper bus ticket           2-4 weeks
• Cotton cloth              1-5 months
• Rope                         3-14 months
• Woollen cloth             1 year
• Painted wood               13 years
• Tin can                        100 years
• Aluminium can           200-500 years
• Plastic bottle              450 years

Admittedly, this list comes from an organization that, at its heart, needs things to be some measure of worse than what they are. :) I'm aware of that. However, a couple of these substances I know I have seen at dates similar to what are given, so that lends some credence to the list. If they are exaggerating the time it takes a plastic bottle to disintegrate by a factor of 5, that means the thing is still floating around out there for what, 85 years +/-? Much longer than I'd expected.

I know how fast plastics break down on my boat, and in the maritime environment in general. It's way faster than that, for things to get to a point where they are unusable, or considered untrustworthy to perform their function. A bleach bottle as a bail bucket might last two years, exposed to the sun constantly.

But once it breaks into the crumbly pieces, well after I am done with it, it's around a lot longer.

That is what struck me - those little pieces, the ones that don't sink, that'll be floating for another 50 years maybe. Wow.

There was a thread a while ago on this subject on the Cruiserlog forum ( out of Australia I believe)

Here's the link-
http://www.cruiserlog.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4291

And here's a link to a quite interesting article about the "garbage patch" out in the Pacific that I referenced-

http://beachcombersalert.org/RubberDuckies.html

Valid point(s) !
The larger point is that we are polluting too much, we have way to much packaging and waste that ends up in the oceans. The ocean is full of life, including ours when you think on it. We should not be using the ocean as the final dump for our un-harmonious consumer life style.  If we want to have some prestine places in the world, where we can sail, swim, eat from, play in. we need to take steps now. Not wait until the film is completly true. Even if it is not that bad, why wait until it is to change the problem. So even us on our sailfar boats make a difference, small, like our boats, but... that is still one less piece of plastic, can, bottle, out there. The Great Wall was built one rock at at time.

Quote from: Captain Smollett link=topic=1346.msg12715#msg12715 date=
Zen, thanks for posting that link.  They are doing some important work, and the more word that gets out on that the better.

What I'm going to post is meant to devalue neither the research nor the message of that clip.  But I would urge a word of caution in how we read it.  Part of my objection arises from a 20 year career as a professional scientist/researcher and the push to be "correct" rather than merely convenient.

With that, I offer the following questions/comments:

• I was quite struck by the visual of the plastic floating in the sample bottle.  But, I have to ask, just how much sea, ie, what volume of water, did they sieve to extract THAT MUCH plastic?  That's a VERY important question, as it goes to 'concentration' of the plastic.  Sure, they present a nice visual, and it was probably calculated for maximum emotional impact, but they conveniently leave out the all important NUMBERS that make something SCIENCE.
• They mention their studies show 6x more plastic than zoo plankton.  WOW, that's big.  That's a global type number.  Huge.  My question is have they shown they don't have a sampling bias in their experimental technique - is there 6x more plastic than plankton in the sea water or is that an artifact of their experiment?
• LIfetime of the plastic in the water.  Kurt is correct - plastics don't last as long in environments where they are exposed to sun light (unlike, say, being buried in a landfill).  Plastics floating on or near the water's surface will have a MUCH lower half life than the (incorrect) conventional wisdom of thousands of years suggests.  Does their research explore this?  What is the time profile of their results?  The same throughout the year, spikes, etc?  Remember, the statistics of a single number are meaningless.
• Back to the 6x more plastic than zoo plankton for a sec.  Is there THAT MUCH plastic, or has there been a reduction of the amount of zoo plankton?  Both?  A relative comparison of one to the other is cute, but does NOTHING to point toward causality.

I bring this up for several reasons.  One, this work has been done by "environmental scientists," and I know from direct experience of both working with some and teaching some, that the rigor of "objective science" in this field is often lacking.  I'm not saying this is so with these guys, and I recognize this is just a clip on YouTube, but for what it is worth...

This Clip on YouTube is NOT science.

It makes a powerful statement; it presents a strong visual and emotional impact.  The point - stop polluting - is just as valid no matter what the answers to my questions are.  But I was trained to look at work like this and ask hard, critical questions because "truth" does matter at some point.

Fair Winds.

Quote from: Zen on December 30, 2007, 09:12:29 PM

The larger point is that we are polluting too much, we have way to much packaging and waste that ends up in the oceans. The ocean is full of life, including ours when you think on it. We should not be using the ocean as the final dump for our un-harmonious consumer life style.  If we want to have some prestine places in the world, where we can sail, swim, eat from, play in. we need to take steps now. Not wait until the film is completly true. Even if it is not that bad, why wait until it is to change the problem. So even us on our sailfar boats make a difference, small, like our boats, but... that is still one less piece of plastic, can, bottle, out there. The Great Wall was built one rock at at time.

Just to be clear, I agree 100%.  Any pollution or any waste is TOO MUCH.

Kurt, I too was really struck by the 'pellets' of plastic that so resemble the zoo plankton.  That alone should give anyone pause about this stuff.  That and the albatrose chick on Midway that died because it had a shampoo bottle cap in its stomach...just wow.

We talk about the sailfar spirit in terms of the trade-off between small-boat advantages against convenience.  I think, it is my opinion, that this video at the very least shows what happens when convenience wins.  Whatever else we do as small boat sailors, I think it is important for us to show we really DO have a different attitude than "waste, consume, pollute, if it suits ME."

Grog for the Capt!!  ;D

Well said Capn Smollet.

Personally, I think that most small boat sailors are far more conscious, putting aside CapnK's dreadful lapse, of the environment and our impact on it.  ;)

Fortunately, a lot of companies are beginning to see the problems caused by excessive packaging, and are cutting down on package size.  The latest software and hardware packages I've gotten for my computer were quite different than the previous versions...much smaller and much less material involved.

For instance—the iPod used to come in a package that was about six inches on a side... a cube.  The most recent iPod package I have seen is maybe 1.25" x 5" x 3.5" or so. The exterior package was all paper-based, and much of it looked like recycled materials. There was a lot less plastic in the packaging than previously seen. Now, if all the other companies would just follow suite.

We all seem to be in pretty violent agreement here. <grin>

I see an analogy with the global warming debate. If we put half the energy of the debate into reducing our output we would make a real dent in the production of CO2 and noxious gases. Less pollution is inherently good, regardless of global warming truth and causalities.

So even though I moan about the weight of my four-stroke outboard every time I heave it up onto the rail, it does spit less bad stuff out than an equivalent power two-stroke. Of course if I rowed more often I'd produce yet less bad stuff and be healthier besides.

The decomposition times listed above are longer than I expected for organics. One issue is whether there are adverse affects from the presence of an object during decomposition. We operate on the basis of an assumption that glass and metal are okay while plastic is not. Is that true? I don't know if there is another ocean crossing in my future, but if there is I may rethink what goes over the side.

I also wonder if there are efforts already underway to bring improved trash management and recycling to the third world, particularly those bits of it (like the Bahamas) from which we gain so much pleasure directly and vicariously. If there are such efforts, I'd like to know what I/we can do to support them.

Quote from: Auspicious on December 31, 2007, 09:00:03 AM

The decomposition times listed above are longer than I expected for organics. One issue is whether there are adverse affects from the presence of an object during decomposition. We operate on the basis of an assumption that glass and metal are okay while plastic is not. Is that true? I don't know if there is another ocean crossing in my future, but if there is I may rethink what goes over the side.

With the usual qualifier "it depends," (mostly on degree I think), I think we can say iron based cans and glass are okay.  We can think of glass simply as fused sand, or alternatively, sand as finely broken glass.  Same stuff.

Iron is a necessary mineral for life, and iron salts (ores) abound in the earth's crust.  So, I would assert tossing the iron cans overboard would have no harmful effect.

Paper is wood, a food item for many organisms, so I see no negative ecological impact to putting paper back into the ecosystem.

Interestingly enough, and just to throw this out there, we have such a 'reaction' to petroleum based products as 'pollution.'  While again I emphasize there is an issue of degree, I did a consulting project a few years ago in which I had to settle a dispute between two companies on the degree to which "mineral oil" could possibly be naturally occuring in a plant oil extract (versus a contaminate added by one of the companies).  Mineral oil is chemically similar to diesel fuel, but you might be surprised at how much of this is part of the natural environment - many plants (hickory, for but one example) contain "mineral oils" in the nut shells, and some plants even EMIT mineral oils into the atmosphere.

So, when we talk of the decomposition of plastic resulting in small "petroleum" hydrocarbons, we DO have to be a bit careful; this is not as "unnatural" as we are often attempted to be led to believe.  The issues might be levels and locations, but it is not as "absolute" in badness as the politcal wing of "environmentalism" pushes.

Again, this in no way is meant as an excuse for "pollution."  What galls me is that in the past few years there has been tremendous research and progress into the recycling of plastics (North Sails anyone??), so the wholesale dumping of these materials is even less necessary than it once was.

I fear the issue is, and always will be, those that just don't care about anything other than their own immediate wants or perceived needs.  Of course, I may be somewhat hypocritical at this time, as all the needless, wasted plastic packaging that came with the Christmas gifts given to my children by my family....

and all the needless wasted petroleum to MAKE that needless wasted plastic.

And just why in the heck do small things like batteries have to be encased in plastic suitable for armor plating??? I have on occasion taken a package out to the shop and CUT IT OPEN WITH  A BANDSAW to get the product out!!!

In fact,we were given a pair of small LED flashlights for Christmas by Laura's son. THAT package had to be cut open using the bandsaw- the plastic was too tough for my Leatherman serrated blade!!

Packaging is truly a frustration. I shan't rant on the subject, but it does make me nuts sometimes. I saw an ad on TV last night for a special purpose cutter just for plastic packaging!

The packaging for batteries (in large quantity) at Costco is a wrap of cardboard and a cellophane cover. You can unwrap it with a thumbnail. Much better. In fact, I think I'll write them a fan letter.

Be aware that some "paper" products aren't wood-based, or at least contain some non-cellulose fiber materials in them.  Many paper plates are actually laminates that have a thin film of plastic on them, and as such, should not be thrown overboard, but packed and disposed of on land. 

As Capn Smollett has pointed out glass and sand are very much the same thing in different forms, and tin cans are probably less dangerous to the environment than many other forms of packaging. 

As for the new modern "bubble" packaging that is nearly indestructible... the stuff is designed to fit the needs of the retailer, not the consumer.  It showcases the merchandise quite well but is very difficult to open, so theft is much less of a problem.  The fact that end users can get injured trying to open is besides the point and of little concern to the manufacturer or retailer.

Since at least one person felt compelled enough to disparage me publicly :-\ because of this thread, what follows here is a response at length with regards to the environment and my relationship to it. I post this in order that I might be understood better, and not have misconceptions out there about who or what I am. Personally, it's disappointing to me that I'd even have to do this, but as the founder of this website, it now seems a necessity that I state definitively my stance in regards to the topic of our environment. I would have thought that prior postings of mine had made this clear; evidently, they were not clear enough for some.

Regarding plastics in this thread specifically: I did not do what I've done out of grossly negligent 'non-concern' for our planet; indeed, the reality was quite the opposite, as was written before for all to see. My reasoning for shredding plastic trash was to make it get back to it's constituent elements quicker, because, in my admitted ignorance, I considered that the better alternative to stowing it in a hole land-side for some future generation to deal with. That I was uninformed about the length of time it takes that process to happen, that would be my sin.

Hardly, I think, a reason to be pilloried, yet there it is.

Actually, and quite contrary to the prior subtle accusation, I'm no ecological troll. In fact and in reality, I'm sure that I live within one of the lightest ecological 'footprints' possible in our culture. I'd readily wager that it is quite a bit smaller than most folks, here or anywhere. Also, in composing this, I've realized that I pretty much *live* recycling. :)

I produce 2-3 grocery store bags of trash per week (say 2-3 cubic feet). That's less than 20% of the amount produced by an average American, from what I've read.
I live only on my boat, and do not maintain a separate residence with it's own consuming overhead.
I drive as little as possible, and in an older car that I bought used (1991, so it does have emission controls). I buy old cars figuring that the pollution produced from an older engine is much less than the pollution generated from the process of making a new car for me. Also, I don't like promoting the thought process that allows continued production of new cars for purchase at a whim.
I frequently bike instead of driving, when the trip is within reasonable range.
My boat is an older, much used boat - 'recycled', if you will. Just as with cars, by 'recycling' an older boat instead of buying a new vessel, I lessen the ecological impact of both my existence and choices.

I've been environmentally aware since I was much, much younger, growing up in relative 'country'. I read Muir and Thoreau and more, and saw the sense of what they wrote when I was in my early teens. I have always lived as much as possible in a manner of harmony with the world around me.
I've organized and done several long-distance kayaking expeditions to promote awareness of the effects of pollutions on our rivers, using them as a method to raise money for agencies like The Nature Conservancy, while simultaneously promoting their efforts through print, radio, and TV press conferences held along the route.*
I've contributed money and time to groups and events which protect and preserve our natural resources.
I just recently gave a free website - design, updates and maintenance, and hosting - to a group of people that were trying to stop the construction of a commercial marina on the banks of a local, undeveloped river. And so on.

I did buy some electronics recently - a new computer, 4 months ago, but it's a business tool, and the prior laptop was a 2001 model, getting long in the tooth for the complicated graphic work I do almost daily. I still have the box the new one came in, in my storage unit, and will keep it for the lifetime of the computer, in case I need a box for it. My mp3 player is a 2001-vintage Archos, my cell phone is over 2 years old, and would be older, if they hadn't made me go to a digital model when the network switched over. The prior phone I had for longer than 5 years. My camera is 5-6 years old. I don't consume lightly, in other words.

Last, and probably the biggest thing I feel that I personally could do (and in full understanding that it is a highly personal choice, and most certainly not one that I judge other people on or by): I've never reproduced, and will not do so. :) This was a decision I made for myself a long, long time ago. My reasons for this at their most basic are that I think that the world would be a better place with less people on it, and this is just one other way I can do my part, by making at least one less consumer of the worlds resources.

I could go on, but this should be enough to reasonably clear things up.

What other people choose to do with their lives is not an overriding concern of mine, and I do my best not to fault others for their choices.

I've learned that many people will do as they do, not as they say, but choose to feel righteous just for having said the saying part. That boggles me.

Of course, I do wish that everyone would live mindfully and harmoniously with the environment of the little blue planet around them. I do what I personally can to be that way, yet I realize that there are some things I may wish which I don't have the power to control. That which I do have power over, I do my best with. We all have choices in our lives that we could make in order to effectively further the lifetime of our planet.

So there it is, that's who CapnK is, in his relationship to the environment around all of us. I hope that's good enough for you - it's good enough for me, at least. :)

-----------
*(I'd be remiss at this point if I didn't mention some sponsors who really helped our efforts on those expeditions. Patagonia, Perception/Aquaterra, Wilderness Medical, Quest Outfitters, and SunCom were all principal sponsors in what we did for our rivers, and I can never thank them enough.)

Quote from: AdriftAtSea on December 31, 2007, 11:08:44 AM

glass and sand are very much the same thing in different forms

Sorry to be pedantic, but if you are going to simply reiterate what I said, say it right.  Glass and sand are NOT different forms, they are the SAME THING.  Silicon dioxide, +/- some impurities.  The only significant difference is particle size, which is a PHYSICAL property, not one of composition (ie, a chemical property).

As for paper vs composites, I meant what I said when I said PAPER.  If I had meant composites, that's what I would have said.  PAPER is wood.

Okay, go ahead.  Blast into me now ...   ::)

Capn Smollett-

I did say it right.  By forms I meant physical, not chemical makeup.  If I had meant chemical properties, I would have said so.  The word composition does not appear anywhere in my previous post....  ::)

Just in case you don't understand:

Def: Form (Lat. forma Eng. mould), refers to the external three-dimensional outline, appearance or configuration of some thing - in contrast to the matter or content or substance of which it is composed (compare with shape).

Quote from: Captain Smollett on December 31, 2007, 12:33:47 PM

Quote from: AdriftAtSea on December 31, 2007, 11:08:44 AM

glass and sand are very much the same thing in different forms

Sorry to be pedantic, but if you are going to simply reiterate what I said, say it right.  Glass and sand are NOT different forms, they are the SAME THING.  Silicon dioxide, +/- some impurities.  The only significant difference is particle size, which is a PHYSICAL property, not one of composition (ie, a chemical property).

My point, which you obviously missed, is that many things that may be mistaken for paper are actually either composites or plastic, and that one should be cautious about throwing "paper" products overboard, when in reality they may not, in fact, be paper.  ::)

QuoteAs for paper vs composites, I meant what I said when I said PAPER.  If I had meant composites, that's what I would have said.  PAPER is wood.

Okay, go ahead.  Blast into me now ...   ::)

Dan, I don't think I miss your point.  What I miss is the point of your posting what I said again, and adding tangential information that only confuses the issue.

On another note, Kurt, I'm sorry you felt the need to justify yourself on this board.  I think I can speak for at least some of the others and say we know who you are.  You mentioned the WHY of what you thought which was quite reasonable.

Let's face it, guys, the 'conventional' wisdom on all this stuff changes as we (as a race) learn more.  I'll use a parallel example.  These days, clinical research very clearly shows that infant mortality decreases when babies are put to bed on their backs - hence the "Back To Sleep" campaign to educate parents.

That was not always the case.  About thirty years ago, it was believed 'better' to put babies to sleep on their stomachs.  It is arguable that this advice actually increased infant mortality. I have one family member who lost a child to SIDS, in the 1970's, and he clearly remembers being 'instructed' to put the child down on the tummy.  He carries an noticable amount of guilt now, because NOW, with 20-20 hindsight, he knows that was NOT the best approach.

What is important is that we keep our minds open to learning new things - to not always THINK we know everything and that the world (and our place in it) is static.  Albert Einstein was fond of saying that when you think you know something, all understanding stops.  So, whether we are talking about the evolution of knowledge in regards to SIDS or a change in understanding on the RELATIVE rates of plastic decomposition in the sea vs in a landfill, the important part is that we (as a species AND as individuals) allow our knowledge to evolve.

Before we get all super-sanctimonious about this plastic stuff, we MUST admit at least the POSSIBILITY that we are still only seeing it in one dimension.  Who knows, we MIGHT find in another 20 years of research that it is actually BENEFICIAL to the ocean's ecosystem in ways we cannot fathom right now.  Okay, that's a stretch, and I doubt it myself, but it COULD BE.  Far far stranger things have happened in man's scientific development in the past 3,000 years.

I'll close with this as an example to ponder.  The hypothesis of plate tectonics in geology was once loudly ridiculed by the scientific community when it was first proposed as being pseudoscience rather than science.  Now it is THE accepted foundational theory of many geological processes. 

Science and understanding change over time.  Blasting someone, anyone, for being willing to learn something new about the world, and alter their actions based on that (a very big deal), seems to me somewhat disingenuous at best.

Quote from: CapnK on December 31, 2007, 11:54:02 AM
Since at least one person felt compelled enough to disparage me publicly :-\ because of this thread, what follows here is a response at length with regards to the environment and my relationship to it.

I DIDN'T DO IT!!  :D

For the record, I started this thread innocently enough, CapnK exposed a minor ignorance he held, and I stated that was not my intent.

I believe CapnK made an honest mistake, and honest evaluation and an honest redirection. Grog to you sir!!

I don't think anyone should belittle a person with these fine qualities. Lashes to whoever prematurely judged CapnK.

Now let's move on. I've got cans to dispose of!!! :)

Quote from: Captain Smollett on December 31, 2007, 02:10:22 PM
Dan, I don't think I miss your point.  What I miss is the point of your posting what I said again, and adding tangential information that only confuses the issue.

Can he use a word like TANGENTIAL on this forum??? :o

Isn't 'tan' meaning touch and 'genital' meaning, well you know... Oh, it's gential

I need to get out my dictionary... Sounds dirty  ;D

FWIW,

  I saw Capt K express a great deal of remorse as he was pouring the used motor oil into the sewer drain during our last visit...


;D

 

Quote from: s/v Faith on December 31, 2007, 02:27:52 PM
FWIW,

  I saw Capt K express a great deal of remorse as he was pouring the used motor oil into the sewer drain during our last visit...

Crikey.


You saw that?




I thought you were too busy throwing your old 12V house batteries in the Bay to notice...




;D

Quote from: Lost Lake on December 31, 2007, 02:18:01 PMOh, it's gential

I need to get out my dictionary... Sounds dirty  ;D

LOL! Good one. :)

It's hard to keep up with Smollett when he starts usin' them thar 50-cent words.  ;D :D

On a more serious note:

CJ - good links you posted a few back. I'd heard the rubber ducky story before, those things are washing up all over the world now. I saw a story not too long ago that some were found in Ireland...

Dave - re: packaging - Yep, I've seen that package-opening device advertised. I wonder how much packaging *it* comes in...?

Y'all remember those toys from the 60's that you could make molds from things by heating a plastic sheet over the object you wanted to mold? Too bad that some company doesn't create a plastic with that kind of capability after it's been moulded once already. Just iron it flat, heat to remold. While they're at it, they should make it to where you can melt it in a pan with other plastic of the same type, so if you want to make something *really* big...  ;)

It's a crazy mixed up world.

I think CapnK wants to make a home molded boat... :)

Quote from: CapnK on December 31, 2007, 02:39:14 PM
Y'all remember those toys from the 60's that you could make molds from things by heating a plastic sheet over the object you wanted to mold? Too bad that some company doesn't create a plastic with that kind of capability after it's been moulded once already. Just iron it flat, heat to remold. While they're at it, they should make it to where you can melt it in a pan with other plastic of the same type, so if you want to make something *really* big...  ;)

It's a crazy mixed up world.

First off, grog to Kurt for being non-defensive as he learned, and then for calmly outlining where he stands. We all can learn -- when we stop learning we start dying.

Like Kurt I have and won't reproduce. I do however have a nagging feeling that the wrong people are reproducing in this world. Nonetheless, about the only thing we don't have a shortage of on this planet is people. Soylent Green ring any bells? <grin> {note: this is a joke, morbid perhaps, but a joke}

Like Kurt I live aboard and keep my footprint light. My trash production is about the same. I do choose to buy things new on the basis of a philosophy of taking good care of them and keeping them until they die at the end of long and productive lives. As an example, today I retired a 20 MHz 386 computer I bought new when it was on the cover of PC Magazine as the "fastest desktop computer ever." It has served me well as a desktop (going from DOS to Windows 3.1 to 98, then NOSNet as a packet radio controller, then Linux as a firewall and router. After 20 years or more (a long life for a computer) it finally failed unfixably. (Is that a word?) I think I'm doing my part to keep my footprint light.

Giving forward, I work on composting projects, am signed up for oyster farming on the Chesapeake, and recycle aggressively. None of this takes much time, provides entertainment, and is quite social.

If you don't do something for your community on a local, regional, national, or global basis you can, and you can do it without having to devote all your free time to it.

Now let's go sailing!

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2007/12/are-there-reall.html

Quote from: CapnK on December 31, 2007, 02:39:14 PM
Y'all remember those toys from the 60's that you could make molds from things by heating a plastic sheet over the object you wanted to mold? Too bad that some company doesn't create a plastic with that kind of capability after it's been moulded once already. Just iron it flat, heat to remold. While they're at it, they should make it to where you can melt it in a pan with other plastic of the same type, so if you want to make something *really* big...  ;)

The 60's toy was a vacuum former.  I was in that business actually; a while ago.  FYI, plastics _can_ be melted in the same type and reused.  Gradually, however, the quality goes down.   Glass and Aluminum can be recycled without losing quality, but glass recycling is very expensive - energywise.  Aluminum is actually easier to recycle than to make new.

I did some work in plastics recycling years ago.   The biggest issue is that the incoming stream of same type plastics has to be PURE.   Only one type.   This is a problem in municipal recycling, etc.   

Another mistake, I think, was we killed the making of plastic grocery bags biodegradable.   The argument 15 years ago was that we could recycle the bags if they were pure, but additives that would allow biodegradable makes it not recyclable. 

Now, I see bags flying, floating, and hanging EVERYWHERE!!!   It is depressing.   

Happily, I'm not a plastics guy anymore.

Todd

not to be picky, but as a kid i loved my "vac-u-form."   can still recall the smell as those little sheets of plastic melted over the various forms and faces that you could make.  here's one on ebay:::
http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-MATTEL-VAC-U-FORM-VACUFORM-TOY-W-BOX_W0QQitemZ160203560922QQihZ006QQcategoryZ30QQcmdZViewItem

also, about the plastic bags....as oil prices go off the charts, bio-bags become competitive and these bags are biodegradeable (made from vegetable oils, i believe).  maybe too little, too late, but gotta keep hoping. 

I was told by an old long term voyager that if you heat an empty can before you throw it overside when far out to sea, the heat helps to destroy the 'finish' on the metal and it consequently rusts and breaks down very much quicker in the salt water. He also said to break any glass bottles before ditching them.

So now any empty cans I usually hold in the flame of the galley stove (with a pair of pliers)when I'm making tea.  I know, I know..bloody daft Englishman but I hate to see rubbish in the ocean.

Cruising the coast of mainland Greece in the area of the Gulf of Kolpos, I promise you I sailed through Thousands of plastic bags, I can only assume they blew out to sea from some landfill site.

I don't care if people laugh when I eventually reach port and they see a couple of large black plastic rubbish sacks lashed to the rail, I won't dump plastic or non bio-degradeable stuff at sea, the sea creatures were there before us, it's their home.

Thank you!

Quote from: saxon on February 29, 2008, 04:54:57 PM
I was told by an old long term voyager that if you heat an empty can before you throw it overside when far out to sea, the heat helps to destroy the 'finish' on the metal and it consequently rusts and breaks down very much quicker in the salt water. He also said to break any glass bottles before ditching them.

So now any empty cans I usually hold in the flame of the galley stove (with a pair of pliers)when I'm making tea.  I know, I know..bloody daft Englishman but I hate to see rubbish in the ocean.

Cruising the coast of mainland Greece in the area of the Gulf of Kolpos, I promise you I sailed through Thousands of plastic bags, I can only assume they blew out to sea from some landfill site.

I don't care if people laugh when I eventually reach port and they see a couple of large black plastic rubbish sacks lashed to the rail, I won't dump plastic or non bio-degradeable stuff at sea, the sea creatures were there before us, it's their home.

  I merged this thread into one Eric had posted about the trash he jettisoned overboard on his cruise back from Hawaii.  For any who may not know about that trip, he did it in 1985 in a Pearson Ariel.  I am not going to say that we did not know not to throw plastics overboard but I will say the awareness level was much lower then it is today.

  While we were in the Bahamas, we really enjoyed our stops at many 'unspoiled' beaches as we took our own route and got away from some of the more traveled / developed areas.  We were continually amazed at the quantity of plastic flotsam that we found on the beaches.  I will say that I think the life of many plastics may well be exaggerated somewhat though, as much of the plastic had been degraded by UV to the point it was brittle and crumbling.  I don't point this out to encourage throwing it over the side, just the opposite.  I now believe the hazards to wildlife may well be greater then I previously appreciated them to be.  The small pieces of plastic seem perfect for wildlife to ingest and I wonder what the real damage is.

  For years on ships we threw all our trash over the side.  While plastics were not supposed to go into the bags, it often did.  Like Eric, I too wonder where this ended up. 

  As for me, I no longer do this.  I also try to pick up what I can... which BTW, can be a good way to work on boat handling for man overboard recovery.  ;)

 

10 miles out, maybe 15 miles NW of  Florida Bay sometime around 3am.

  Steering by a wonderfully bright planet, clear night with a slightly confused lumpy sea.


I see something glimmer on the water, I steer off a couple degrees.... it gets closer.

Finally I sail right up to it, and if I had the boat hook I might have snagged the silver plastic wrapper from the sea.

  I could not believe just how far away I could see this thing.


If I ever fall over, please don't throw me a ring, don't need an EPIRB.....  Just give me a handful of those
shiny plastic wrappers.