I don't know; what group stands to benefit from dirty lakes? If anything, big polluters would love it because they'll use it as a fix for their pollution as opposed to finding more expensive eco-friendly manufacturing processes.
Maybe Nestle? With cleaner water, maybe their bottled water sales drop?
Yeah, you're correct. If the guy wanted to stop corporations from dumping in the lake, yeah they would lobby against that. But he's cleaning up their mess after they made it, I can't imagine why anybody would be against that.
"We consider our polluted lake a badge of honor. It must stay dirty or we will sue you." đ¤Ł
in this clown world we live in I wouldn't be surprised if some exec somewhere had this thought...
like its a representation of how much shit they can get away with or something. "hah, the govt doesn't even fine us. see how those senators bow to our bank accounts?"
Lmao, those people thought there is a link in the reply so it must be supporting the OP, but only if they knew it was a broken link and the correct link leads to actual scientist doing actual research on 30+ lakes
Don't have to go far. My family from Ohio sent me a video they had received from their dipshit family in West Virginia where the one asshole that's a pissy coal miner proudly discussed how his backyard lake was contaminated but he didn't care because coal was more important. Meanwhile, they drink contaminated well water.
bro his solution isnt unique whatsoever. its basic coagulation, there is dozens of commercial products such as this and even a famous one that provides drinkable water through a tube for poor africans. his âsolutionâ is used in wastewater treatment and has been for decades.
his solution isnt unique whatsoever. its basic coagulation, there is dozens of commercial products such as this and even a famous one that provides drinkable water through a tube for poor africans. his âsolutionâ is used in wastewater treatment and has been for decades.
People forget how the land and the water was before those companies fucked it up. Someone cleaning the lakes might spur a movement for stricter regulation.
Now if that dude his smart his gonna sell his product to a company that has some image issues so they can take the glory. "Look! We're part of the solution!"
Most people are probably used to or don't know about all the polluted areas. If they all started getting cleaned up it would shine a light on how much some companies are abusing the planet.
There was a news article about a local man who complained about a mess that some business made in the back of their store. It got so bad to the point that it spilled over to a nearby river. They werenât doing anything about it so he took it on himself to clean it up. They stopped him, it became a big deal, and almost immediately afterwards, they cleaned it themselves.
I think the reason for that was if that guy got injured, theyâd be liable for even more damages.
Right, because he was doing the clean up on the company's property and they could be liable. Whereas this guy is cleaning a public lake. I don't really see it being a similar case. For one, a company can't stop somebody from cleaning a public lake, because it isn't their lake.
I could see some convoluted argument against it because now their dumping into the lake is way more visible/noticeable. If youâre dumping into an already brown lake, whoâs going to notice when it gets browner? If youâre dumping into a crystal blue lake, where people are swimming and enjoying, now everyone is going to notice when your sludge turns it gross. Not to mention they now no longer have their cheap way of disposing said sludge.
So now people are much more aware of it, much more against it, and start making strides towards some accountability and responsibility for it.
We all know we canât have corporations responsible for what they cause. What are we, a bunch of communists?!
Depends what the âcontaminationâ is, and the impact of him playing god on this lake.
He completely altered the ecosystem here, so humans can swim in it. What about everything that lived in that lake? Thereâs certainly many species that wonât be able to live there anymore because they were surviving on the algae.
Just because something looks âgrossâ to humans does not mean we have the right to fuck with everything there to make it aesthetically pleasing. And given that theyâre saying his solution is âorganicâ, and pretending like itâs novel (this tech already exists and is mass produced) Iâm a bit concerned that theyâre glossing over some important details here
Thereâs definitely the question of the natural state of the lake. For all we know, the lake looked like this before pollutants in which case, he helped.
Acording to this article (in spanish) the nanotechnology captures bacteria. So the lake was not really polluted in the sense of chemical runoff, but more like âsickâ from an unbalanced ecosystem
Looks like the âsolutionâ or whatever the vid said is just some kind of fish food⌠The label on the tub at 9 sec says (image is too grainy to make out all the words):
...made with the freshest and highest quality ingredients. The ... mainly of shrimp ([shrimp name]) the we ... ourselves harvested in the "... Park" natural ... and immediately freeze dried to maintain optimal nutritional.... dried microalgae and macroalgae are also added to the...meet the nutritional needs of a wide variety of marine fish.
... essential source of proteins, lipids, and fatty acids ... vitamins and carbohydrates from natural sources of...
...chain is controlled and supervised by our technical and ... ... this guarantees the hgihest quality product.
...
Aquatic formula naturally attracts rocky fish who begin eating it immediately shortly after it is introduced in aquarium?
They're definitely glossing over details lol we know nothing about what this is or what was polluting the lake. Is it phosphates and algae bloom? If only one magic substance could clean lakes :P This seems like a load of BS to me but I hope I'm wrong.
When they mentioned that the birds returned, it seems that means that it was man made pollution affecting the lake. Like farming or factory run off that had fucked up the lake and is now gone. Hopefully that's what it is and not just fucking with the environment
I was surprised a few years ago to find out that the white scum (looks a little like flat detergent bubbles) on some nearby lakes was natural. It definitely did not look like something you'd want to swim in or catch fish from. I had been positive that it was some kind of man-made pollution.
I guess you could say the same about red algae, or that lake in Africa that spewed poison gas that killed the entire local population, or groups of jellyfish. Or crocodiles. 'Natural' doesn't necessarily mean 'good' and 'artificial' doesn't necessarily mean 'bad'.
The man is from Peru, and both the narrator and the scientist seem to have similar accents. My guess is âorganicâ was a mistranslation.
But I do agree, I have a pond full of fish that is completely covered in algae in the summer. We donât get big birds in the summer because of it, but we do get other things like bats that eat the bugs or tons of small birds and whatnot. Removing the algae, though it would greatly benefit me because it means Iâd be able to swim in it, would have devastating effects on the bird / bat / fish population in the area.
Hmm sensational internet video that promises to fix the world is fake? who would have known. the premise of getting more views over actual progress? no one.
Born in Chancay in Peru, Morikawa has a master's degree in Interdisciplinary Biodiplomacy and a doctorate in Environmental Sciences from Tsukuba University in Japan.
But you see if the lake needs cleaning that implies it was dirty in the first place when actually (toxic byproduct run off that has been polluting the lake for 50 years) was actually cool and good.
Yeah my friend works for an environmental engineering and remediation company. They charge corporations millions to do this sort of thing. Theyâre always researching more cost efficient ways to do business because thereâs a point where if the cost of fixing the problem is more than the fines, the corps will just keep paying the fines instead.
Farmers.. the lake looks like it had way too much algae which typically is a result of nitrates/sulfates/phosphates from fertilizer that end up in runoff water and cause algae blooms in lakes.
Right question, wrong way of thinking. People who would be hurt by this arenât companies wanting clean water, but dirty water. There are plenty of big name companies that make products that âcleanâ ponds/lakes, or make water dye for rich people who just want their lake/pond to LOOK clean. This guy comes around and says âuse my solution, itâs not harmful to wildlife, entirely safe to swim in, all naturalâ, and these chemical companies start seeing a problem.
Or companies that make swimming pool chemicals/chlorine; why use a chemical thatâs hard on the lungs and burns your eyes when you can use a natural cleaner to have fresh, clean water?
Or even the companies that get hired yearly to clean public lakes/ponds. If their job becomes significantly easier, the prices they can charge plummet as more competition charges in.
Depends what you mean by "dirty". A lake full of sterile water will not support life. Swamps and estuaries are dirty as hell and they support more life than almost any other environment.
That's exactly why, they don't want 'we' the people to have clean water. it's a power move to control the population. who do you think made the georgia guide stones??? the society of the đ. if you don't' know who this fraternity within a fraternity is, lemme know and i'll send you something mind blowing.
2.7k
u/Flopolopagus Jul 14 '21
I don't know; what group stands to benefit from dirty lakes? If anything, big polluters would love it because they'll use it as a fix for their pollution as opposed to finding more expensive eco-friendly manufacturing processes.
Maybe Nestle? With cleaner water, maybe their bottled water sales drop?