Tuesday, July 31, 2018

half of all the plastic we’ve ever produced has been made since the year 2000 (including plastic straws)

The anti-plastic straw movement: What it is, Why it matters, and Is it a good thing?

If you’ve been paying attention, then you’ve probably noticed a growing environmental movement focused on eliminating plastic straws. Companies like Starbucks and Marriott are doing it, cities like Seattle and Oakland are doing it, and even England has announced a ban for next year. But why all the hate on plastic straws, and how much of a difference will this actually make?

A plastic symbol

The world has a huge plastic problem. Essentially, we’re producing and using a large amount of plastic that we are hardly reusing or recycling. Plastic has penetrated every corner of the Earth, from the deepest parts of the oceansto the frozen wasteland of the North Pole, and we’re producing more of it now than ever before.
Nearly half of all the plastic we’ve ever produced has been made since the year 2000. Estimates of our global plastic production range from 335 to 400 million tons every year and out of that, around 8 million metric tons of our plastic waste enter the oceans from land each year. These plastics don’t really disappear — they just break down into smaller and smaller pieces and are often ingested by wildlife or even humans.
It’s easy to understand why the world is so in love with plastic: it’s cheap, it’s easy to produce in great volumes, and it’s durable — its durability being one of the main problems, as it takes unbearably long to degrade. Plastic has become so ubiquitous that almost half of it (40%) is deployed for packaging that is used once and then discarded. So it seems natural that if we want to fight plastic consumption, we start with single-use plastics — like straws.
An all too familiar sight. Image credits: Forest & Kim Starr.
Rarely necessary, straws have become somewhat of a symbol for our needless plastic abuse — but that’s not to say that plastic straws aren’t a problem themselves. A whopping 500 million drinking straws are used every day in America alone. That’s an average of 1.6 straws per person per day — enough fill over 125 school buses with straws every day.
So we don’t really need straws and they’re a burden on the environment: let’s ban them. Simple enough, right?

So wait, no more straws?

There are alternatives to plastic straws.
  • You can use stainless steel straws. You can either carry your own around or have them at bars. However, both options are seemingly unlikely, as few people would really like to carry their own metal straws around, and most bars would presumably not be happy to give metal straws away.
  • Several companies are trialing edible straws. Particularly suitable for long, icy drinks, edible straws could become a staple at cocktail bars, but it’s hard to see them really replacing plastic straws.
  • Other degradable straws have also appeared on the market. It’s not clear how economically viable these options are, but they could end up making a big difference.
  • The most likely alternative, which is already present in a great number of English bars, are paper straws. Disposable paper straws are still waste, but they’re a kind of waste which is biodegradable. However, paper straws get mushy if you take too long to finish your drink — though some bars I know might consider this an advantage.
Lastly, the most suitable alternative in most cases is not using a straw at all. Let’s be honest, you can have a Coke just as well without the straw, so why use it in the first place? Unfortunately, we consumers have proven to be quite an unreasonable bunch, which is why a ban is being discussed in the first place.
Paper straws don’t really eliminate the problem, but they create a much more manageable type of waste.

Problems with a straw ban

Things are not as simple as they seem, however. Problems with a straw ban range from trivial to very serious.
For starters, as any lipstick user can attest to, straws can make your life easier as you don’t need to drink directly from the cup. Icy cocktails can be nigh impossible to drink without a straw, and paper strawse can also become a choking hazard, if they start mushing in the drink.
More pressingly, the lack of straws would be a problem for people with disabilities.
“Many people with physical disabilities such as cerebral palsy and multiple sclerosis require the use of plastic straws in order to hydrate,” representatives from Disability Rights Washington wrote in the wake of Seattle’s straw ban. “Other types of straws simply do not offer the combination of strength, flexibility, and safety that plastic straws do. Metal straws become hot or cold and offer a risk of injury.”
You can make a case for asking these people to bring their own straw, but is that really fair? Instead of placing this burden on the disabled community, perhaps we should make bars have straws available only on request. As far as inclusivity is concerned, it simply doesn’t seem fair to add an extra burden, as small as it may seem. Reading stories from a first-hand experience can be heartbreaking:
“Nondisabled people ask what we did before straws existed, and I have harsh news for them: We died,” writes S. E. Smith for Vox. “Or we lived in abusive, grim, isolating institutions where we didn’t need straws because we got 24-hour attendant care.”
Finally, there’s one big question we need to ask about the straw bans.

Will this make a difference?

Here’s where things get really complicated. Let’s say we find an inclusive way to ban straws without causing extra problems for anyone. What does that actually do?
In the case of Starbucks, for instance, an investigation has revealed that the new lids will end up using more plastic than the old lid and straw combo. That’s unlikely to be the case in many other places because more often than not, plastic straws don’t replace anything — they’re simply an add-on. But even if we remove all the straws in the world, how much will that even matter?
Australian scientists Denise Hardesty and Chris Wilcox estimate, using trash collected on U.S. coastlines during cleanups over five years, that there are nearly 7.5 million  straws lying around America’s shorelines. Extrapolating the number, they estimate that there are between 437 million to 8.3 billion plastic straws on coastlines throughout the world. So in that regard, banning future plastic straw usage can make a big difference.
In terms of sheer waste, things are a bit less clear. Every year about 8 million metric tonsof plastic end up in our oceans. Straws may make up about 4% of the plastic trash by piece, but they account for far less by weight. Straws weigh, on average, .42 grams, so that would only amount to 2,000 tons a year — which, compared to 8 million, is not that much.
“Bans can play a role,” says oceanographer Kara Lavendar Law, who co-authored a 2015 Science study on plastic bans. “We are not going to solve the problem by banning straws.”

A foot in the door

But there is a different argument to be made, and it’s perhaps the most important one. As social psychology has shown numerous times already, if you want someone to do something important for you, you’re better off by first asking them to do a small favor first — which brings us to our initial argument.
Banning straws is not really about banning straws. It’s not peak slacktivism, as some have called it, but rather it’s about sending a message that’s essentially saying society is ready to take a small but decisive step in a very long journey. I’m not sure it’s the best step, and I’m not sure how much of a difference it will make in the grand scheme of things, but it’s a step — and we need as many steps as we can get.
end quote from:

A shattered tectonic plate underpins the Tibetan Plateau — explaining the area’s weird earthquakes

A shattered tectonic plate underpins the Tibetan Plateau — explaining the area’s weird earthquakes

A new geophysical model shines some light on the Tibetan Plateau’s unique geology.
Tibetan Plateau.
Natural-color image of the Tibetan Plateau.
Image credits NASA Earth Observatory.
Some 50 million years ago, India was a huge hit in Asia — quite literally, as the peninsula smashed into the continent after breaking up with Gondwana, creating the Himalayas of today. We don’t know very much about the specifics of this collision, as the Tibetan Plateau — an area at the epicenter of this collision — is quite inhospitable and hard to reach, for earth scientists and laymen alike.
New research, led by scientists from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, comes to shed more light on the event. Not only do the findings help patch our understanding of the area’s geology. The results also help explain the highly-peculiar — and very violent — seismic activity in this area.

Shaking things up

“The continental collision between the Indian and Asian tectonic plates shaped the landscape of East Asia, producing some of the deadliest earthquakes in the world,” said Xiaodong Song, a geology professor at the University of Illinois and co-author of the new study.
“However, the vast, high plateau is largely inaccessible to geological and geophysical studies.”
Song and his team drew on high-resolution seismic (earthquake) data to generate the clearest model of the Tibetan Plateau’s geology to date. They pooled together geophysical data from various studies and other sources, and collated them to generate seismic tomography images of Tibet — think of them as ultrasound imaging for geology — that peer down to about 160 kilometers under the surface.
Their work reveals that the upper mantle layer of the Indian tectonic plate is broken into four distinct pieces that push under the Eurasian plate. Each of these four fragments lies at a different distance from the origin of the tear and moves at a different angle relative to the surface than its peers. The new data match well with recorded earthquake activity, geological, and geochemical observations in the area, the team writes, which helps improve confidence in the results.
Model Tibet Plateau.
Seismic wave velocity images of the Tibetan Plateau in image a (map view) and image b (cross-section view). In image b, T1, T2 and T3 mark mantle tears, the circles indicate earthquakes deeper than 40 kilometers and the white contours show earthquake density.
Image credits Jiangtao Lia, Xiaodong Songa, (2018), PNAS.
“The presence of these tears helps give a unified explanation as to why mantle-deep earthquakes occur in some parts of southern and central Tibet and not others,” Song said.
While the Indian plate was definitely shredded after the impact, the bodies of intact crustbetween the tears (the four fingers themselves) are still strong enough to accumulate strain — and such strain, when released, is what causes earthquakes. At the same time, heat upwelling from the deeper mantle can pass through the torn areas more readily. Areas of crust directly above the tears become more ductile and less susceptible to earthquakes as they warm.
This last tidbit of information helps explain the “unusual locations” of some of the earthquakes in the plateaus’ southern reaches, according to co-author Jiangtao Li, who adds that “there is a striking correlation with the location of the earthquakes and the orientation of the fragmented Indian upper mantle”.
The model also helps us get a better idea of the local geology as a whole, explaining some of the area’s more peculiar surface deformation patterns, such as a series of unusual north-south rifts along the plateau, for example. Such deformation patterns, together with the location of most earthquakes in the area, further suggest that the crust and upper mantle are strongly coupled in southern Tibet — i.e. surface rocks are very well ‘glued’ to deeper formations.
Simplified model.
Idealized cartoon illustration of the tearing of the Indian plate and coupling between the crust (orange) and the mantle lithosphere (blue) in south-central Tibet. The thickness of the crust and mantle lithosphere is not to scale. The white dashed line marks the possible boundary between the underthrusting Indian crust and the overriding Himalayan orogenic prism and Tibetan crust.
Image credits Jiangtao Lia, Xiaodong Songa, (2018), PNAS.
Overall, the findings offer a clearer picture of the state of the crust and upper mantle in the Tibetan Plateau. The findings will also help us better assess areas that are at risk from earthquakes, the team adds, with the potential to safeguard lives and property from their devastating effects.
The paper “Tearing of Indian mantle lithosphere from high-resolution seismic images and its implications for lithosphere coupling in southern Tibet” has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

How much money can a solar roof save you in California?

Profit from your roof space: find local deals on solar in your area, eliminate your power bill.
Enjoyed this article? Join 40,000+ subscribers to the ZME Science newsletter. Subscribe now!
end quote from:https://www.zmescience.com/science/tibet-plateau-tectonic-fingers-95973523/