At Blue Fox Bay Lodge in Alaska, Madden sits amongst a pile of derelict fishing buoys and floats that were collected around Afognak Island, Alaska, by Colleen Rankin.
Close-up of Laysan albatross. At the instigation of cinematographer Jan Vozenilek, the Smithsonian Institution and United States Fish and Wildlife Service have transferred the mummified remains to Washington, D.C., for study of the source of the plastic and its effect on ocean life.
back upon returning the empty glass bottle. The bottles went back to the bottling compa- ny to be washed and refilled with more soda, maybe 20 times or more. This system worked well, and there was little environmental im- pact from the containers. This concept of designing things to be
thrown away, even though they are physically quite durable, is relatively new. For soda and beer, the transition to so-called “one-way,” “throwaway” or
“convenience” containers
started tentatively before World War II and was completed in the 1980s. These contain- ers tended to cost more than the drink inside, and it’s not clear that the customer got all the convenience, but they eventually caught on. It soon became commonplace to see neighbor- hoods, playgrounds and roadsides littered by the empties – glass bottles, tinned steel cans and, eventually, aluminum. (Disposability is a relatively recent phenomenon, but it predates our plastic culture.) By the 1970s it had spread to other goods, such as razors, diapers, pens and cigarette lighters. They were no longer valuable, but rather, replaceable. The special problem with plastic litter is
that its low density allows the most common types to float. Once litter hits the ground, it easily makes its way to rivers and storm drains that move it to the ocean. There it is carried by currents and curious predators to places as re- mote as Midway. It becomes a global problem. There are technological fixes to some of our plastic problems, such as new materials,
18 AMERICAN INDIAN SPRING 2015
new designs for objects, that will reduce their harmful effects on wildlife and landscapes. Recycling has been widely adopted and makes sense, particularly for worn-out plas- tic objects that no longer serve their function. But it takes a lot of energy to chop, melt and reform a perfectly good plastic bottle into...a new plastic bottle. Biodegradable plastics are being developed,
and may have fewer side effects because they use the natural decay cycle of ecosystems. But remember, the soda container has to perform well during bottling, shipping, storage and as we drink it. How do you time that bottle and cap to degrade right when you finish drink- ing the soda? Does it need to be warm, humid or in the presence of microorganisms? Where should it hang out until then? At your house? In a landfill? A designated biodegrading facil- ity? Or do we think that degradation process should happen in the ocean? Will it happen soon enough to prevent hurting an albatross that eats it? The problem isn’t so much that plastic lasts
forever, but rather that it outlives our expecta- tions, gets loose in the world and causes spe- cific harms. Even degradable plastic doesn’t just disappear. Changes in behavior, culture and organizational infrastructure will be re- quired to make this solution successful. The heart of the problem for the albatross (and us) is not just the plastic. We have desig- nated too many things as disposable without taking responsibility for where they go after
we are done with them. We also need to re- member that culture is our greatest technol- ogy, and it evolves continually. The most com- prehensive way to deal with the plastic waste problem is to create much less of it to begin with. Since the global population is rising by the billions, this will not be achieved through fewer people. It has to be achieved by decreas- ing consumption and increasing re-use. Some plastic objects can become less dis-
posable rather than more. If we factor in the ecological costs of disposal, objects become more valuable and worth reusing. We can make durable plastic things with more care, better quality and higher design so they are worth returning, reusing and even passing down to the next generation. Tradition and heritage could be great tools in this respect. For those things that should be used briefly and then thrown away, we need to engineer them from materials that biodegrade harm- lessly or can be reincarnated by recycling. It is clear we’ll need a concerted plan, and
it will be complex. Those who first coined the term Anthropocene have stated the problem in the language of science. Paul Crutzen and Eugene Stroemer suggested that we had en- tered a new epoch characterized by pervasive human effects on the global environment. They also said, “To develop a world-wide ac- cepted strategy leading to sustainability of ecosystems against human-induced stresses will be one of the great future tasks of man- kind.” Answers will include technological fixes but will also require retrieving traditional cultural values and applying them to a planet crowded with more than seven billion people and counting. X
Odile Madden, Ph.D., serves on the executive committee of the Smithsonian’s Living in the Anthropocene Initiative. She is a materials scientist and head of the modern materials research program at the Smithsonian’s Museum Conservation Institute.
IMAGE BY CINEMATOGRAPHER JAN VOZENILEK (
JANVOZENILEK.COM)
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68