August 02, 2008
Paper or Plastic?

The Seattle City Council passed an ordinance six to one (two absent) to impose a twenty-cent fee if you request a paper or plastic bag at the grocery store checkout. More hassle for the public, more paperwork for the store, more bureaucrats for the City, it's just your nanny government at work. Newbie City Council Member Tim Burgess made the classic frog in warming water statement when he said, "I think after a few months of legislation, we will wonder what all the fuss is about. Same as when we moved to mandatory recycling." Well, not quite Tim. Separating my refuse into two containers rather than one hardly compares to having to carry a dozen cloth bags in my car just in case I purchase a large amount of groceries. If my family has more than one car, make that two-dozen. No one needs twelve bags you say; stand in line behind someone shopping for a family of four? The plastic bags I don't use for trashcan liners get recycled plus I don't have to wash them, using all that precious water, soap and electricity.

If you don't like all this, vote them out. The problem is, short of a major scandal, the reelection rate is very high. In Seattle, tossing out one liberal council member only gets one just as Left for a replacement. Mr. Burgess defeated an incumbent but little changed as far as a voting record is concerned.

Thanks to the Populists who wrote the Seattle City Charter, there is a remedy in Article IV to the bag issue and other related silliness. It's called the initiative. Get 17,967 people (ten percent of the number of votes cast for Mayor in the last election) to sign an initiative repealing the bag ordinance, a majority to vote for it, and the Council may get the message.

Remember the frog. Put in a pan of water and heated slowly on the stove, he hardly notices the warming water until it's too late and he's cooked. Bonfires on the beach, fast food restaurants, driving your car, Styrofoam containers, trans fat; remember the frog.

clearfogblog

Posted by warrenpeterson at August 02, 2008 08:52 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Separating my refuse into two containers rather than one hardly compares to having to carry a dozen cloth bags in my car just in case I purchase a large amount of groceries.

"Oh gee, I wonder what's NEXT?", asks that hapless ignorant frog frolicking in his hot tub.

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on August 2, 2008 09:05 PM
2. Remember the frog. Put in a pan of water and heated slowly on the stove, he hardly notices the increased use of non-renewable fossil fuels, the rapid expansion of development to meet the "needs" of people escaping urban reality, the unsustainable growth rate among religious families, the exponential growth of debt in a consumer-based society... yes, remember the frog.

Posted by: Go Grammar! on August 2, 2008 09:32 PM
3. Putting up an initiative to terminate this damn thing would be a easy deal. One poll taken a few days before the SCC vote came away with 62% of the people hating it.

The one thing that has always mystified me about this law (ordinance, whatever) is the inclusion of paper bags. All of the paper bags I get from the store are made from a percentage of post consumer waste and they recycle the easiest of anything, so I don't get it. The rag against the plastic was that some of them ended up in the land fill, or they were being eaten by marine animals or they were floating around the city by the zillions. Conversely, paper was kept out of the land fills by being recycled, were not eaten by anything and I can't ever remember a shopping bag laying in the street somewhere, so what was the deal with (essentially) banning them?

The more these eco-wackos gain control the stranger and more extreme things become. I shudder to think what will be next. Wanting to be early in suggesting the next planet saving policy I wrote the Times a letter yesterday:

Dear Seattle Times;
As far as I'm concerned, Mayor Nickels' eco-cred is beyond reproach but weak. Sure, fees for food store sacks is OK but what about Nordstrom's, Macy's, etc.? There are hordes of bags that need to be taxed (oops, "fee") into elimination at these places too. Don't chicken out Mayor, save us.

But I have a idea that will burnish his honor's eco-cred for decades to come and it doesn't cost a penny. In addition to not costing the tax payers, it will immediately ease traffic congestion and improve air quality. I propose that it be made mandatory that all Seattle city workers must take public transportation to and from work. Think of the decrease in planet killing CO2! Think of the decline in traffic at peak rush-hour times! Think of keeping us from using so much foreign oil! It's just one big win win.

After all, if the Mayor of Seattle and all of the employees that support his eco-policies are really serious about saving the planet, why not put their money where their seat is? Like on the bus.

Sincerely,

I doubt they'll print it.

Posted by: G Jiggy on August 2, 2008 09:33 PM
4. Re the frog: remember closing the streets to cars....

Posted by: Michele on August 2, 2008 09:44 PM
5. One more reason not to live in King County.

I hope some enterprising person starts a business selling plastic bags at grocery store street corners all around Seattle.

And smart Seattle residents should go outside the city to shop at other stores that don't ban plastic. Nothing like a decline in sales to help Seattle grocery frogs learn more about Mayor Nickels and his boiling water pots.

Posted by: Jeff B. on August 2, 2008 10:01 PM
6. @Jeff B.:
If that keeps you out of King County, please provide a list of other common sense ideas that will send others like you away. I'm sorry it's so hard for you to imagine bringing your own bags to the store. I hope some enterprising person starts a business convincing people that an unsustainable lifestyle is desirable. Oh wait, your party beat me to it.

Posted by: Go Grammar! on August 2, 2008 10:04 PM
7. Does this mean we can start calling Nickels the Bag Man?

Posted by: hinton on August 2, 2008 10:24 PM
8. Aren't these the sort of people you just love to hate? The pushy twerps who love to lecture you on your errant ways, the loud mouthed Himmlers that seem to dominate condo meetings and Seattle City Council members who would be right at home in Stalin's Soviet Union.

Of course a plastic bag ban is sheer madness. It doesn't accomplish a goddamn thing except inconvenience customers which in their mad arrogance is what the City Council thinks it has the right and the power to do. But the City Council has no such right. It cannot ban willy-nilly whatever it feels like. There are objective laws that must be adhered to.

In order for a ban on plastic bags to go into effect it must be shown that individual's rights are being violated. Obviously nothing of the sort has happened or is likely to happen. Moral preening is the only reason the City Council voted for this ban. The lowly plastic bag like bottled water has harmed no one but they have incured the displeasure of the intelligensia and therefore they must go.


Posted by: Bill K. on August 2, 2008 10:24 PM
9. Anonymous Coward Go Grammar,

An unsustainable lifestyle is one without energy. Which is where Nancy Pelosi wants us to go. I happen to find a lot of uses for plastic bags. But one party wants to tell me exactly how to live my life, and that I can't reuse plastic bags. I guess I'll have to buy new thicker bags in the garbage bag aisle to serve my needs. Bag, that take even more oil to make, and get used only once. How sustainable.

How about I set your thermostat so that my life fits within your sustainability goals but yet I don't need to be uncomfortable. What do I care if you are cold any more than you care if I can't make use of grocery store plastic bags.

In other WA counties, we are entrusted to make good decisions as adults. But it is obvious that you Progressive children in King County need supervision.

Posted by: Jeff B. on August 2, 2008 11:36 PM
10. If a bag costs $0.20 each, then put a $5.00 waste fee on a Sunday Seattle times, think of the carbon footprint and deforestation printing newspaper causes. They are ruining our planet and all the useless information is available on the internet.

Posted by: Marmstro on August 3, 2008 02:07 AM
11. Ok so now I separate my trash, took it upon myself to stop buying water in plastic, water my plants late at night, run the dryer late in the evening to take stress off peak hours, walk to the store to save energy and buy products with the least amount of packaging. And now I have to go to the shelf and decide if garbage bags will cost more or less each than the ones I used to get free. Oh wait ! I live Puyallup where we just have to learn how to breath from all those nasty cars coming here for the fair. Life is great !

Posted by: HappyHeathen on August 3, 2008 02:10 AM
12. Have you seen some of the ratty looking bags that people bring to the store, I wouldn't want to put the food I'm buying on the same counter where some these things have been previously placed, it's disgusting, you don't know where they've been. Isn't this a sanitary issue.
Oh wait, maybe they'll pass an ordinance that all counters must be sprayed down with bleach between customers.
Perhaps we can just decline the offer of a bag purchase and have the "box person" just deliver it to the car loose.

Posted by: Mark on August 3, 2008 03:15 AM
13. Seattle has now committed a hate crime and hate speech--watch--it will sue itself & pay reparations.

Non-white bags treated differently. Bag-free zone odrinance is not tolerant and exclusionary. Same-sex and same-size bags now banned while cloth bags are allowed. Illegal alien (acquired outside of seattle) bags discrminated against & deported. "Fat" bags (physically challenged) now banned from eateries. Bags blowing around and landing in disabled parking spots are now discriminated against under ADA. Homeless bags under further attack and discriination. It's a lawyer's dream!! School system bag fee proponents yell "it's for the lunch bags!"

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on August 3, 2008 06:50 AM
14. This is so much fun to watch from outside the city limits. The mayor and city council are a guaranteed source of continuing entertainment to the rest of the world. When they run out of bad ideas the disappointed citizens of Seattle seem to do well on their own. Remember the monorail initiative? Time to stick a fork in these boiling frogs, I think they are well done.

Posted by: ROCKETMAN on August 3, 2008 07:20 AM
15. While I growing wary by the day of the Seattle's sprint to being the supreme nanny state. I think people (rich, poor or other) will just bite the bullet and pay the .20 fee. If you buy 10 bags of groceries, thats $2.

Would most people rather have the two dollars in the their pocket, the answer is yes? But convenience will trump cost. Almost all plastic bags floating in the oceans are not ours anyway, they are from others parts of the world.

Remember when Environmentalist wackos wanted us to use plastic because it took one old growth Douglas Fir to make one paper bag?

Posted by: LCRW on August 3, 2008 07:28 AM
16. LCRW @ 15: "convenience will trump cost"

I agree it's the nanny state at work, and the principle is troubling, but there are worse things going on with taxation and the nanny state to get upset about. it's really not that inconvenient, once you get used to remembering to plan ahead and put your bags back in your car and wash them from time to time (that's what conservatives do, right, plan ahead for our own future rather than waiting for somebody else to save us?).

I switched to cloth bags FOR convenience, not because of environmental concerns. You can cram many times the weight and about 3 times the volume into the canvas bags as you can into the disposable ones, so it means less trips from your car into the house and no more bags ripped open from too much weight. when I forget, I just buy another cloth bag at the store for $2 or $3. at least the bag tax is realistic for me to avoid

Posted by: nothingburger on August 3, 2008 08:59 AM
17. I'm FROM Seattle. And Seattle has become a great place to be FROM.

Posted by: Hinton on August 3, 2008 09:11 AM
18. I live outside Seattle, but I intend to take all of the plastic bags I have around the house and take them with me on my rare trips to Seattle for a fitting send off in the trash bins.

Posted by: kini on August 3, 2008 09:54 AM
19. "If you don't like all this, vote them out. The problem is, short of a major scandal, the reelection rate is very high"...

Hmmm, yet another scathing indictment of the rampant stupidity of the average Seattle voter...

Posted by: juandos on August 3, 2008 10:13 AM
20. As one who commutes into Seattle and leaves at the end of the day, I can say categorically I will no longer be purchasing anything in Seattle. This consumer hostile tax grab is only to fatten the wallets of government, NOT to protect the environment as claimed.

Posted by: pbj on August 3, 2008 11:03 AM
21. It has been said, many times, that Governments will erode your Freedoms and Rights under the Guise and Subterfuge that we are doing this for the good of Society. That is the common tool that is being used in this case. You got the City Council sitting around with nothing to do except, how to impose another restraint, tax and burden on the Citizens of Seattle. It's all about growing Government and Power over the People. Only Blind Liberals will continue to buy into these continuing game-plays that are robbing and enslaving the People. Lets hope King County doesn't afflict the same Rip-Off on it's Citizenry.

Posted by: Daniel on August 3, 2008 11:38 AM
22. I just heard through the grapevine Mayor Nickels
is proposing 3 legged underwear mandatory for
all Seattle residents. That means move em left or
right then turn em inside out for a total of
4 crotches. Think of the water, electricity,
laundry detergent that will be saved.

Posted by: mark on August 3, 2008 12:41 PM
23. Jeff B @ 5, Not only sell bags but have some custom printed. Just to get under their skin call them "Nichol Bags" (did I spell that right?)

Posted by: PC on August 3, 2008 05:43 PM
24. pbj@20-My sentiments exactly, and that's just what I said when I heard of the ruling. I work at a company that has been in Seattle for 70 years, and is getting pushed out (moving to SnoCo in 09). No more commute, no supporting Seattle Socialism.

Posted by: Carol Kujawa on August 3, 2008 08:55 PM
25. #15, et al., did you see the recent article in Reason Magazine where Seattle rated #2 in Nannyism in a list of 35 cities? The article pointed out that this also means #2 in restricted personal freedom.

I have saved and reused grocery bags for many years. Now I shall just use my trips outside the gulag to grocery shop.

I like the term, "Nickel Bags." The connotation seems somehow apt.

Jeff, please don't use the term "progressive" in its political sense. It is merely used by mealy-mouthed liberals ashamed of their own stupidity, or, at least, wishing to conceal it.

Posted by: JB on August 4, 2008 01:53 AM
26. I don't live too far from the city limits so I will grocery shop in Shoreline. Unfortunately, disease tends to spread so I am sure that Shoreline will adopt the same idiotic plan. Any time the government can grab a few more pennies, they will do it.

Posted by: NW Denizen on August 4, 2008 06:55 AM
27. FWIW, the whole frog-in-hot-water thing is a myth.

I used to call him Mayor Blah-Blah, but I guess I have to get used to calling him Mayor Bend-Over.

I, too, reuse and recycle all of the plastic bags I get, so this is nothing but an added expense -- goal accomplished!

Posted by: Frank Black on August 4, 2008 08:43 AM
28. For anyone that doesn't already know, plastics disposal is a huge problem.
The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, also described as the Eastern Garbage Patch is an area of marine debris in the central North Pacific Ocean located roughly in an area between 135° to 155°W and 35° to 42°N. The patch is characterized by exceptionally high concentrations of suspended plastic and other debris that have been trapped by the currents of the North Pacific Gyre.

The size of the affected region is unknown, but estimates range from 700,000 km2 to more than 15 million km2 - greater than twice the size of the continental US. It has also been suggested that the patch may represent two areas of debris that are linked.

Further, estimates are that 80% of the garbage comes from land-based sources, and only 20% from ships at sea. Currents carry debris from the east coast of Asia to the center of the gyre in a year or less, and debris from the west coast of North America in about five years.

While a 'ban' of plastic bags is mainly symbolic and certainly bureaucratically bloated - what sort of real solution for reducing the amount of litter and waste that ultimately ends up in our dinner would meet with the approval of most of the gang here? I'm genuinely curious if anyone has any ideas beyond the obvious criticism that the current solutions are light weight political gestures.

Posted by: Acid Brain on August 4, 2008 10:43 AM
29. The great pacific garbage patch can be incinerated. All that is needed are a few appropriately sized oil spills that are ignited. Poof!

Posted by: Paddy on August 4, 2008 11:14 AM
30. Acid: About 30 years ago Tacoma Boat designed and developed a vessel that was a solid waste incineration vessel, to be anchored off shore, with a 99.9% incineration rate, no air pollutants. And guess what? The environmentalists killed the permitting process. Same old story. It's been going on for decades. Every good idea is killed at inception and we are left with Nickle bags.

Posted by: katomar on August 4, 2008 11:38 AM
31. I am regularly polled by several organizations, both political and consumer. One that contacts me every day is YouGov SelectUSA. Everyday they have a 'topical' subject with several questions regarding it.

Todays cracked me up:

San Francisco is the first US city to ban large supermarkets large and chain pharmacies from using plastic bags made from petroleum products.

Do you support or oppose this move?
Strongly support
Support
Neither
Oppose
Strongly Oppose
Don�t know

From January 2009, Seattle shoppers who forget to bring along reusable bags will be charged 20 cents for every disposable paper or plastic bag they use to carry home their purchases at grocery, drug and convenience stores.

Do you support or oppose this move?
Strongly support
Support
Neither
Oppose
Strongly Oppose
Don�t know

Given the choice, would you prefer a ban on plastic bags or to be charged for using plastic bags?
Prefer a ban on plastic bags
Prefer the option to be charged for each plastic bag I use
Nothing should change
None of these
Don�t know

I'll give you an update on the results tomorrow morning!

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on August 4, 2008 01:45 PM
32. If my memory serves me right Burgess campaigned or implied that he was going to bring his self-professed law enforcement expertise with him and give some long overdue attention to SPD. Burgess just doesn’t seem to be coming through with that boast. However he has immediately jumped on board with social engineering and at least one “international study mission.” Said “mission” caused him to miss the vote giving Paul Allen his latest wish; worsening the Mercer Mess. His vote wouldn’t have changed the outcome. However it would be interesting to see where Burgess stood on yet another public subsidy of Allen’s toys, games and hobbies. Burgess obviously found out how to use the junket budget, sorry – travel budget, very quickly.

Burgess needs to go back and look at his notes from his time spent on the Elections Commission. Especially take a look at his comments regarding the ineffectiveness of the Council during the “Strippergate” era. He needs to revisit his repeated criticisms about shortcomings with SPD and SFD caused by Council ineffectiveness. Also take a personal look at his published concerns over utility rates.

.New council member international study mission? Wonder how many bullets and targets that would have paid for SPD to use at training or dog food for the K-9 unit.

Burgess is rapidly becoming “the butt of jokes” he once accused his predecessors of being. He needs to understand that not all the citizens in Seattle have short memories and that their votes can be bought with parking spots for motor scooters.

Posted by: Hey Tim! on August 4, 2008 02:00 PM
33. Katomar - I think it was accounting that sunk that venture, not whale huggers.
The EPA received a separate application from At-Sea Incineration, Inc. (ASI), for the Apollo 1. However, ASI’S parent company, Tacoma Boat, filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in the fall of 1985. This move, brought on partly by delays in the finalization of EPA’s regulations, forced ASI to default on $68 million in guaranteed loans granted earlier by the U.S. Maritime Administration for construction of its two incineration vessels ( 14). The loan was paid in full by the Maritime Administration. The uncertain financial status of ASI led EPA to hold its permit application in abeyance pending resolution of the situation (50 FR 51361, Dec. 16, 1985). (from
http://www.fas.org/ota/reports/8616.pdf)

Posted by: Acid Brain on August 4, 2008 02:40 PM
34. Wow.

I knew "Go Grammar!" was a liberal. And I figured -- obviously correctly -- that he's a fascist.

I did not think, however, that he was a religious bigot. Now I know.

Posted by: pudge on August 4, 2008 03:18 PM
35. Acid Brain,

I have diligently searched for images of the great oceanic garbage patch. I haven't found any.

I am skeptical of the size claims from the various marine environmental agencies.

I call this thing the Wide Plastic Sargasso Sea.

Note that marine circulation patterns would keep our local grocery bags out of the Plastic Sargasso.

Where is the equivalent here in Puget Sound? You know if there was one, every man, woman and dog would hear about it every day.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on August 4, 2008 04:46 PM
36. Why not send Sig down to some warmer waters to make this "Most Dangerous Catch"?

But here's how removal of the Plastic Sargasso would play out.

The bagmass has developed its own delicate ecology not unlike that found in kelpbeds.

Greenpeace would sink Sig's ship in mid operation.

This scenario is not far fetched.

Fifteen years ago the City of San Diego closed off their sewage pipes which drained directly into San Diego Bay. Shortly thereafter environmental organizations sued the city because they had destroyed the "delicate sewage based ecology" of the Bay.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on August 4, 2008 04:53 PM
37. 5 cents to pay off stores to go along with it.15 cents for beauracrats to run it.Sounds like taxing to me, why not just ban the things.Oh then politicians get nothing, I get it now.If bonfires cause global warming then how about cigarette smokers.We cant ban smoking in Seattle cause then there wouldnt be any tax revenue per pack.Seattle is just nothern San Francisco.

Posted by: D W Smith on August 4, 2008 06:08 PM
38. Below are some of yesterdays findings:

Thinking back over the last month, how frequently have you re-used a plastic bag when out shopping?
Every day 8.4%
2-3 times a week 11.3%
Once a week 11.9%
Once every two week 3.9%
Once a month 4%
Have not re-used a plastic bag when out shopping 58.1%

Going forward, over the next month, how likely are you to re-use a plastic bag when out shopping?
Very unlikely 38.3%
Quite unlikely 13.4%
Not sure 18%
Quite likely 16.5%
Very likely 13.9%

Do you support or oppose the move of banning large supermarkets from using plastic bags made from petroleum products?
Strongly support 31.4%
Support 22.3%
Neither 14.7%
Oppose 9.3%
Strongly Oppose 18.7%

From January 2009, Seattle shoppers who forget to bring along reusable bags will be charged 20 cents for every disposable paper or plastic bag they use to carry home their purchases at grocery, drug and convenience stores.
Do you support or oppose this move?
Strongly support 21.9%
Support 21.3%
Neither 9.2%
Oppose 14.8%
Strongly Oppose 30.9%

Given the choice, would you prefer a ban on plastic bags or to be charged for using plastic bags?
Prefer a ban on plastic bags 41.3%
Prefer the option to be charged for each plastic bag I use 18.2%
Nothing should change 24%
None of these 13.5%

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on August 5, 2008 08:41 AM
39. Is Seattle that hard up for money? The bottom line is that the poor can't afford what they buying. To tax them to carry their purchase home is insensitive to their needs. It's down right ludicrous.

You people really need to get your act together and vote these people out. At the rate the council is going with all of the fees they are imposing they will run the tax payers out of the city.

Posted by: kim in vancouver on August 5, 2008 09:14 AM
40. Bart - I'd love to see Sig down there harvesting some plastic, that guy can catch anything. Here are some pictures of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and Marine Debris and this is what Zooplankton look like. In samples taken from the gyre in 2001, the mass of plastic exceeded that of zooplankton by a factor of seven. They are near the bottom of the food chain, so you can do the math on where the photo-degraded polymers end up as they rise through the food chain. Are there no other ideas out there beyond incineration and cynicism?

Posted by: Acid Brain on August 5, 2008 10:18 AM
41. Well, yes, the garbage patch is a problem. But from looking at those pictures, it certainly isn't made up of just plastic bags. I actually didn't see any plastic bags at all in those pictures.

The whole thing is pretty silly, if you ask me. Get an initiative going to overturn this stupid law and I will be the first to sign.

Nickels and the council tax bags, but at the same time promote the building of townhomes that won't last ten years. Where is the waste? They also say that the oil saved by the tax will be the equivilent of taking 660 cars off the road. Gee... out of what, half a million? Not much impact at all.

This tax will do nothing but put grocery store cashiers in an awkward position when someone doesn't have enough reusable bags with them. That and raise some tax dollars.

Posted by: Ken Holmes on August 5, 2008 02:16 PM
42. Acid Brain,

I see only shoreline debris and a couple of underwater images of plastic things in those images.

No Plastic Sargasso. My quest for an aerial view of the bag gob continues.

What is the mass of plastic in the mythical Sargasso vs. the mass of zooplankton in the entire ocean?

And in your example how was the zooplanton isolated and culled from the plastic? And was the plastic weighed dry?

I suppose I could investigate on my own, but the results of my research would be suspect.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on August 5, 2008 05:30 PM
43. I suppose you could Bart. Your obstruction is more revealing than your instruction.

Posted by: Acid Brain on August 5, 2008 05:47 PM
44. The onus of the instruction is on YOU!

You provided us with no convincing evidences of the Plastic Sargasso. You wasted our time by sending us to those sites. THAT is obstruction.


Posted by: Bart Cannon on August 5, 2008 06:36 PM
45. 28--solution--gangs of prisoner boat work teams; mutiny? fine; torpedo/shoot them on sight after warnings & they sign on with that stated in bold ink; let them survive at sea doing all their OWN work AND cleaning up the oceans & getting some fresh air;

deserters shot on sight; non-violent criminals can work off sentences after 2-3 years full time at sea snagging garbage; captains and seamen staffing safety may be an issue, but maybe no more than in a prison;

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on August 5, 2008 09:17 PM
46. Boy Bart, you are really making me sweat sewing up this "I know you are, but what am I?" loop, but I'm game for one more handicapped round. I'll have to reverse the challenge here and ask you to source anything that proves the Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a hoax or even a gross exaggeration. Granted, I can only verify that marine debris or the Great Pacific Garbage Patch exist and are a problem by referencing biased liberal media, spotty government agency reports, and through the nascent but important research currently being done by one pinko dropout from Long Beach and his staff. Here are more pieces anyway. Call it a leap of faith, a conspiracy, or my own delusion.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/roy61/2247528701/

http://www.algalita.org/index.html

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/jul/10-the-worlds-largest-dump

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/10/19/SS6JS8RH0.DTL

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=5524886&page=1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7312777.stm

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-362

Believe It, or Not!

Posted by: Acid Brain on August 6, 2008 01:42 PM
47. Acid Brain, if you tire of your current moniker, perhaps you might try "Iron Lung" in allusion to your ability to extending the the life of this personal thread. Come to think of it, maybe that's the moniker I'll switch to when I squeeze the last drop out of some subject.

I don't see how I can fairly be expected to prove that there are no pieces of plastic in the ocean, but one would think that a floating plastic island miles across would have lots of television footage, maybe even a colony of sea lions living on it.

Before I track each of your links, I would like assurance from you that at least one of them shows one convincing, un-photoshopped aerial photograph of the Plastic Sargasso.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on August 6, 2008 07:20 PM
48. oxuznsqy emtd siydf embnykr ysotzrf jlnqy gzans

Posted by: rxcqf sghrtd on August 7, 2008 08:15 AM
49. oxuznsqy emtd siydf embnykr ysotzrf jlnqy gzans

Posted by: rxcqf sghrtd on August 7, 2008 08:16 AM
50. xbqysoc tjhsdwe nrai fvelk qepshazt tzcpars mvkfble

Posted by: jizowxgbq cifk on August 7, 2008 08:17 AM
51. Warren,

Please block jizowxgbq cifk.

Posted by: Bart Cannon on August 7, 2008 08:47 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?