Subscribe to RSS @
Some time back in the early ’80s, I remember seeing, on the much missed science and technology programme Tomorrow’s World, a quite remarkable demonstration of a method for cleaning up oil spills at sea. It came in the form of a powder and was, I believe, developed in Japan. You just sprinkled some of this powder on the floating oil and within seconds it had turned into a sheet, described as being like soft chewing gum, that could literally be lifted off the ocean surface.
Did we ever see this technology used on subsequent and environmentally damaging oil spills? Of course we didn’t. For sure, there may have been all sorts of flaws and problems associated with the stuff – maybe it had other knock-on effects that made it unviable. Who knows. But it had many, many technological siblings as so much that was showcased on this excellent programme seemed to disappear just as quickly into obscurity.
In a comment left by fractiverse on a recent item, I was given a link to what is, to me, a technology that sounds just as revolutionary and necessary as the Japanese magic powder. This is a machine that, using microwaves, converts waste plastics back into diesel oil and other useful stuff from which it was made. As I have said quite recently, the science behind all this sort of thing just evaporates in my brain a minute or two after I have read it but I still said ‘Wow’!
OK – so there may be 101 reasons why this is not a good idea. But I would have thought there were equally 101 reasons why it is – many of which are covered by the article in the New Scientist link above. Seems to me the more of this sort of technology we embrace, the closer we can get to reversing the harm we are doing to our planet – and it’s still the only one we’ve got.
I don’t remember the magic powder but I do remember some prototype method involving the use of chopped up women’s tights! Does it ring any bells with anyone else. Pleeese, tell me it wasn’t all a dream!
mike powers last blog post..OK Computer?
I’m still waiting for my flying car.
Thuds last blog post..police car!
@Thud: That would be nice…..
@mike power: Well – to be fair, I can’t remember what my ‘powder’ was made of so it might well have been this…
You have to remember that some of these reversal processes can be just as harmful as the original product. The powder to clean up oils spills may be all well and good, but you may be inadvertantly be creating a substance that then takes 200 years to bio-degrade and produces more harmful gasses than a field full of cows.
The Toyota prius, for example, contains a battery that yes, reduces you emissions by technically giving you an electric car, but in truth, the battery itself has a limited lifespan (about 5-10 years I am told), and is an absolute b*tch to dispose of, more so than regular batteries, when it has expired…
I would love to see a process that reclaims fossil fuels from discarded products though, these are the kinds of ideas we need, but in a quick fix society, they’ll never happen.
Who remembers the Sinclair C5, brilliant idea, most unsafe vehicle ever, I’m surprised spontaneous combustion didn’t occur, despite containing no combustable materials what-so-ever.
Darrens last blog post..Alan Knows Best
@Darren: yes – so often it seems that the good side of any technology is outweighed by the bad. Mind you, I am not sure the Sinclair C5 was a brilliant idea….
Anyone remember the ‘Torrey Canyon Disaster’ of 1967? TC was the first supertanker and was wrecked off the west coast of Cornwall heavily polluting the Cornish and French coastline. Years late an ecological survey discovered that not only had the polluted areas fully recovered, they were actually healthier and had more abundant flora and fauna than the unpolluted areas!
mike powers last blog post..Obama/McCain? This is how they’ll do it
@mike power: Fascinating. Any explanation offered?
My understanding is that as the oil broke down over a long period it produced a large increase in the nutrient levels usable by simple organisms which in turn fed through the entire food chain.
It reminds me of the report showing that victims of Hiroshima who had received smallish doses of radioactivity developed fewer cancers during their lives than those in the non-radiated population.
As Maggie said: Funny old world isn’t it?
mike powers last blog post..Tony ‘Two Guns’ Blair
My point exactly, life finds a away. My points about the Sinclair C5 were meant as, it was a quick fix to the congestion and pollution of the day, and if executed properly, would have been a great success, but then people started dying in them…
Who says any publicity is good publicity!!??
Darrens last blog post..Alan Knows Best
@Darren: C5: Totally agree that if it had been built and designed properly – instead of to a price – then it could have been a success.
However – as of 2004 nobody ever died using one (see This news item from 2004). I think, like the ‘fact’ that it used a washing machine motor, deaths were just another urban myth.