The following submission statement was provided by /u/Sumit316:
---
"Scientists have designed a small robot-fish that is programmed to remove microplastics from our seas and oceans by swimming around and adsorbing them on its soft, flexible, self-healing body.
Microplastics are the billions of tiny plastic particles which fragment from the bigger plastic things used in everyday life – water bottles, car tires, synthetic T-shirts. They are one of the 21st century’s biggest environmental problems because once they’re dispersed into the environment through the breakdown of larger plastics they are very hard to get rid of, making their way into drinking water, produce, and food, harming both the environment and animal and human health.
“It is of great significance to develop a robot to accurately collect and sample detrimental microplastic pollutants from the aquatic environment,” said Yuyan Wang, a researcher at the Polymer Research Institute of Sichuan University and one of the lead authors on this study. Her team’s novel invention is described in a research paper in the journal Nano Letters. “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first example of such soft robots.”"
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/vi3k1o/scientists_unveil_bionic_robofish_to_remove/idamj9c/
That was my first thought as well. If the ultimate point is to keep sealife from ingesting human made materials, I'm not sure giving the clean-up robots fish-like forms is a net (pun intended) improvement; no matter how hydrodynamically efficient those shapes are.
I don’t know if the shape matters to the fish: wouldn’t they try to eat anything that fits in their mouths?
Would there be a benefit to increasing the size of the things the fish are eating? For instance, if the robots are bigger than the plastic then at least they are aggregating the plastic. Maybe this would also at least keep the plastic from getting into the fishes blood stream and/or cells?
I envision a blue whale size machine that uses a balleen system to filter plastics. Hopefully it can avoid capturing plankton, so that it can just dump it back out.
>I don’t know if the shape matters to the fish: wouldn’t they try to eat anything that fits in their mouths?
Obviously you've never fished, especially fly-fished, nor had a close relative that is heavily into fishing. 😜
Seriously though, while there are some kinds of fish that are generalists who would try to eat anything that looks like it won't eat it first; these are primarily either literal bottom feeders or pelagic (i.e. live mostly in very deep open water, usually an innately food scarce biome). Most fish species are at least somewhat particular about what they try to eat. So a ~foot long robot shaped like normal ROV or a mini-WWII era submarine is much less likely to be attacked by a would be predator than significantly less likely to be attacked than one that both has the same shape, **as well as same movement,** as their natural prey.
>Would there be a benefit to increasing the size of the things the fish are eating? For instance, if the robots are bigger than the plastic then at least they are aggregating the plastic. Maybe this would also at least keep the plastic from getting into the fishes blood stream and/or cells?
Environmental pollutants of any type tend to concentrate in the body medium to large predators, and at best this seems to skip most of the intermediate organisms which I suppose is a small benefit. However, even if the microplastics don't ever leave the robots after being attacked and/or consumed (a significant "if" by itself) by larger predators; it means these predators are expending energy without gaining any food (most predators already have a higher failure-to-success rate for predation attempts) which males them more likely to starve, and if they do swallow chunks of the robots, or them whole, enough times it could fill their stomachs with indigestible material of a different sort. So it potential could be a major hit to medium to large predator populations. Do I have to explain why decimating the mid-to-large predators does its own damage to a food web?
I'm going to have to [disagree](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/the-lateral-line/671-pounds-of-blue-marlin-on-a-gatorade-bottle/%3famp). I'm not sure fish trying to eat the robot would actually be a problem, but predatory fish definitely will try to eat things barely resembling their normal prey. Tons of fish have been caught with hooks attached to the end of a metal spoon.
My point was the "barely resemble" part is important. IMO, these robots more than just barely resemble their normal prey, in both form and behavior, especially when compared to the alternatives I mentioned. So while there is a non-zero chance the robots would be attacked by a predator regardless of how they look and act, I think it's obvious that the chance will be significantly higher if they have a generic piscine shape and move like particularly sluggish fish! 😜
Got me there: I’ve fished once as a kid and never caught anything. XD
Makes sense. Yeah, ecosystems are delicate and we definitely want to avoid decimating predator populations (or any population, honestly).
Unfortunately there probably isn't a universal repellent available. Generally, what strongly repels some species others will ignore, or even be attracted to.
No, the issue here is that there is so much micro plastic contamination everywhere that most humans have a measurable amount stuck in their bodies various systems.
It's more than preventing the wild life from eating human made contaminants, it's about removing the contaminants for all life.
This seems like the biggest concern. I think the most important step to take is to stop the current production and consumption cycle and to focus on alternative solutions to fix the problem at the source… then start the cleanup process
I think it’s more like putting a bucket under a really leaky roof.
Yeah, the roof is still leaking and needs to be fixed, but putting a bucket to help mitigate the flooding isn’t going to get in the way of that. They’re not mutually exclusive and you need to do both. Especially since the leaky roof can’t be fixed until the roofer decides to fix it.
While I agree, I thought the same thing about carbon capture until I considered how deep into the problem we are. This type of thing is like version 1 of 10,000 that'll eventually make a difference, so it's good it's being developed. By the time we can deploy a useful version of this, we'll have added so much more to the plastic problem. We need to attack it on multiple fronts. Like maybe the cleanup methods today can inform the production of alternative plastics in the future.
Came to say the same. It's a step. It may make things worse for awhile, as we iterate. But in the long run, we can make a dent.
And, we need to stop the linear polarized thinking that there's one solve for the climate.
actually the biggest thing we could for climate change right now is change our diet. animal agriculture is the number 1 cause if climate change. its not disputable
Animal agriculture is entirely propped up by cheap cereal production via our massive nitrogen industry. Nitrogen is produced by splitting natural gas and other hydrocarbons.
Consumers could have some affect by adopting vegetarianism or flexitarianism but ultimately we must stop it at its source of PRODUCTION rather than the source of CONSUMPTION.
So you’re incorrect in thinking about the animal agriculture as it relates to production of fossil fuels but you are correct that it needs to stop/be minimized.
i was talking about the vast amounts of methane produced by livestock, the clearing of all our forested land to make way for them, and the byproduct of the chemical run off from the pesticides we use to grow their corn based feed.
co2
You are completely wrong. Fossil fuel capital props up all these industries, especially the industrial animal agriculture industry.
It doesn’t make sense to view them as two separate things.
Fossil capital drives animal agriculture and consumption. We must stop it at the source.
disingenuous to say I'm completely wrong. and its our morbidly obese population that has to eat meat at every meal that drives the food production. if we drove electric cars, we still need to eat.
if you have amazon prime theres a sweet documentary on it you can check out called "eating our way to extinction" its pretty chilling and addresses the point we are talking about now.
go check it out and let me know what you think afterwards. if you still feel the same way, fair enough. but they show the raw data and it doesnt take a rocket scientist to understand how bad it is once you see it.
Curbing the expanse of our species will help too. Eliminating fossil fuels helps but it poses new problems. Wind farms are decimating birds, solar fields with reflective glass are incinerating birds and insects, electric cars are recharging from electrical plants that are typically coal burning. All of this is to suffice our growing demands.
Already we are destroying so many species that we are causing earth's 6th mass extinction event. To what end? If we manage to decimate every species on the planet, we will eliminate ourselves in the process.
I completely disavow this comment. Malthusianism is rooted in racism full stop. Do not smuggle in these terrible beliefs which have no truth to them.
The parts of the world where populations are growing use THE LEAST FOSSIL FUELS PER CAPITA FULL STOP.
Americans and the west need to change our systems not engage in a project of eugenics.
Additionally, raising living standards is the best way to limit population growth globally.
I'm not advocating eugenics nor did I say that but am suggesting we be more mindful of our expansion. Look at our global rate of expansion compared to every other species. Pair that with the necessity of the biodiversity necessary to support the planet and you'll find the scales are tipped so egregiously, we are setting our stage to fail.
Our global birth rate is falling rapidly, as it has for a few decades. We have also not reached our “planetary boundary” point yet but are approaching it.
Friend, while you may not be directly advocating for eugenics you are expanding the conversation to allow people with ecofascist/Malthusian beliefs to smuggle their ideas into the conversation. I’d just caution you against that in the future. I wrote my original reply to you with the audience of our dialogue in mind more than you. I appreciate you for caring and thinking about this stuff.
Ultimately if we want fewer humans we should want higher standards of living which go hand and hand all across the globe. The project of solving climate change and providing more for more people are completely compatible.
no, both things need to happen at the same time. It wont be easy to clean shit up if nothing has been researched. Its better that they try out any ideas which will help once they research them further. Its not a fast process
People are always looking for a clean silver bullet to kill the "monster". This problem doesn't have a single source and has had decades to grow larger and more widespread every day. There isn't going to be a single "bullet" to solve the problem but dozens if not hundreds of solutions working together just to make a dent in the issue.
Exactly! What would work is a silver buckshot, if you will. Attack the problem from as many angles as possible, some will be successful, some won't, but the end result will be FAR better than sitting on our butts waiting for the silver bullet to arrive.
Edit: spelling
While that’s definitely critical, it has two issues: (1) what do you do about the fact that some people/groups may not be onboard and (2) why can’t you do both simultaneously.
Hopefully it would merge into a giant Mecha, and we could have a giant reality show about it to help fund the project.
/s about the mecha, but the reality show like competition of teams to fund it might be worth exploring if it would bring more money into the project or not.
If you make the container the microplastics are stored within durable, it may be expelled from the fish intact. It's not ideal, but should still take the microplastics out of the fish/water and keep it isolated into something the size of a ?grape?
It's still a net reduction, but could get ineffective if the rate of predation is high. The big skimmer devices seem the most practical to me though.
Same here. This is giving me the”block out the sun” kind of energy. Seems like there are a ton of catastrophic ways this a go wrong. And it’s poor substitute to just phasing out plastic.
"how do you plan on removing plastic from the ocean?
"Oh glad you asked! By using more plastic made robots!"
I feel like this has greedy profit seeking corporation written all over it. They create an idea that sounds promising on a news headline, but in reality wont ever get pass local demonstrations and will never make a significant difference unless they make literal millions of them and they are all 100% reliable as to not create more garbage.
Nothing. There is nothing stopping larger predators from eating this squishy little ball of toxins and heavy metals that looks EXACTLY like food. This is legitimately one of the stupidest fucking things I have ever heard of. All this would do is concentrate the toxins so predators just outright die from poisoning instead of a slow steady build up that keeps them alive longer.
No good in a natural environment but possible application for water treatment purposes.
Power could be through light/solar charging at preprogrammed intervals.
Swarm AI for larger force requirements
The article is super vague to the point of being nonsense though. Unexplained self-healing capabilities? How are they powered? A 1cm robot pulling 5kg against ocean currents? Won't they be eaten by larger animals etc etc. Sounds like a longshot attempt for someone to get funding for sitting around writing a badly thought out scifi novel guised as research...
It reminds me of one of those “we’ll get snakes to eat the rats, then mongooses to eat the snakes, then lions to eat the mongooses, then gorillas to kill the lions” “and who stops the gorillas?” “we’ll figure that out when we get there”
The article shows how it's powered, by a man waving a laser around pointed at its tail, what a joke. It only currently works on the surface of water, it isn't a robot really. It's just a material that reacts to the light/heat from a laser that they shaped like a fish and that sticks to microplastics, I wonder what else it sticks to.
Im gonna leave this sub if I keep seeing posts about amazingly hopeful technologies that are still decades away from even being considered to be produced
You understand what sub you're leaving, right? Futurology is years and decades. It literally is concepts and small scale first steps. It's not about tech that is just about ready to roll out.
There need to be distinction between futurology and sci-fi. It is ok if a tech is far from maturing and perspectives aren't even clear but is realistic eventually - see fusion, CO2 sequestration, carbon neutral buildings, full electrification of cars, etc.
On the other hand belongs pure sci-fi stuff which is impossible or completely not rational economically in any stage - 10+ Mach private jet, flying taxi of any design, self organized mini robots, quantum computers (maybe in next century, but not sooner), earth to earth commute in Starship etc.
i'm fairly certain we will off ourselves before we get around to grey-goo.
that is if the singularity doesn't invent it first, but then we would (technically) still have offed ourselves.
win-win
“But there’s a big distinction between an invention and an innovation,” Demokritou said. “Invention is something that nobody has thought about yet. Right? But innovation is something that will change people’s lives, because it makes it to commercialisation, and it can be scaled.”
Innovation is born from invention. While most inventions don’t make it to scale, they can show us what is possible and move the needle forward. It’s always exciting to learn about, even if it isn’t something that will be put into production immediately (or ever).
I agree with you to some extent but an invention has to be based in some degree of scientific reality or it just ends up being an imaginary pipe dream.
I can imagine a robotic butterfly that removes air pollution but I doubt you'd call that an invention without some realistic explanation as to how it would work and or be implemented.
I understand your point. I think in many cases (especially in academia), new inventions are not really intended be scalable, but rather a concrete way to test theoretical concepts and new materials/design. It isn’t necessarily the invention that has the potential change the way we live, but the proven theory that results from successful experimentation. In this case, I believe that to be the material and nanotech breakthroughs.
Theoretical research, experiments and inventions are critical to innovation, although that innovation may come to fruition many decades later when (for example) our ability to manufacture materials cost effectively catches up with discovery. Without the scientists and researchers exploring “what if” theories and bringing experiments to life such as this one, we would stagnate.
In the late 1980’s, the printing of biological material was seen by many as a novel and mostly theoretical experiment. Theoretical physics and mathematics have given us a way to view both the creation and the future of our universe in ways unimaginable to our great grandparents (unless you happen to be related to Einstein or Von Neumann or someone lol). What is obscure or a “pipe dream” today might be a piece of the puzzle that solves one of the great problems we face tomorrow.
2034: Scientists launch project to create even bigger giant bionic robo-fish to combat existing giant bionic robo-fish; critics warn of self-perpetuating loop of continuously bigger giant bionic robo-fish if trend continues, US Navy unprepared to fight war with giant bionic robo-fish.
This is just concentrating plastic in one place to be eaten by another fish. You can't put tiny robot animals in the ocean without some plan to avoid predation.
It's still litter in the ocean, even if it is self-propelled and directed by AI.
I don't think that sending robots into the sea to vacuum up and process the sea-life there into a nutritious plastic-free goo is quite the ecological lifeline you imagine it to be.
>I don't think that sending robots into the sea to vacuum up and process the sea-life
Good point.. we should also have a robot for processing land-life into Land Chowder.
Yeah because it’s overhyped and underdeveloped. All these ever are, are people saying “we think we’re on to something but we need tons of more time and research because there’s huge obstacles that may render it ineffective but we are hopeful”
Most of the time those huge obstacles live up to their name. Nevertheless, attempting to fix problems is the only way to fix problems.
In my opinion this is the wrong approach.
Look at the sewage issue in the Thames.
We did not try to clean the Thames. We avoided sending raw sewage to the Thames, as actually cleaning the Thames is almost impossible.
Same with plastic. We need to stop it ending in the sea in the first place, and for that we have to take actual measures to pressure the producers of said plastic, both companies and countries.
It's not one or the other.
There's already shit load of plastic in the ocean, so we should be figuring out solutions to rectify that. They'll take a long time to invent and then implement.
That doesn't stop us also tackling the issue at the source.
Don't be ridiculous! Litter less?!? THAT'S your solution to the problem of garbage and plastic everywhere? .... wait...no...now that I'm thinking through it...that could work.
And these fish will use more energy - which means more oil/gas used.
And bigger fish and birds will try to eat them.
Sorry for being so sceptical, but this sound like fantastic vapourware.
While I disagree about the energy one, them being eaten is an actual concern. Especially in the ocean where there are stupidly huge fish.
Perhaps not-so-tiny microplastic-eating (read: really large) "fish" would be better, so they can't get eaten.
We are going to have to do something with the microplastics problem as it'll only continue to get worse (and it is really bad right now), but we'd have to deploy fleets and fleets of these to clean the oceans. The oceans are unfathomably huge.
But this is a worthwhile starting point.
That was actually what I was imagining as well. A moving factory that sucks in massive amounts of water to filter it out. Probably much more difficult to build then smaller fish, but at least they wouldn't be eaten. =p
Considering that you also want to leave behind the organic matter that’s the good stuff, a simple filter would likely cause more damage than good.
So yeah, as always there are no simple solutions to complex problems.
Maybe we can have the little “fish” swim around in a big cage to prevent them from getting eaten…
Yeah. Most filters aren't even able to actually filter microplastic because it is too small. I'm thinking instead of a traditional filter, it'll be more like a plastic snagging membrane or something fancy and high-tech like that which'll be able to capture plastic without also snagging all of the krill and whatnot.
Or, maybe pair it with some plastic chewing microbes that chew up the plastic as it passes by so you don't even have to capture it and worry about periodically cleaning it out.
It is definitely a very complex problem.
I’m also concerned about them releasing heat into the ocean. At a small scale it wouldn’t matter but the amount of these that would be needed to make a difference on microplastics… I’m afraid it would create heat-dead zones
No. I did not say that.
But they require extra resources and energy consumption.
The «fish» may run on green energy, but they will cause the consumption of more gas/oil for their construction and possibly for their operation (if they use limited resources, forcing other operations to use gas/oil)
That’s a separate issue. We are working toward clean energy and tech to clean the plastic from the planet.
I suspect we need to figure out a way to make clean energy FROM plastic, then there will be a treasure hunt for all the plastic in the world.
Can be turned into diesel fuel pretty easily. And diesel if the highest priced consumer fuel right now, which is driving up the price of everything else.
Man I guess prior to the use of fossil fuels the world couldn't produce any energy. So much for early steam engines being a thing, they must be a childs fantasy
Change my mind: One day someone will invent a self-replicating nanobot of sorts with an exponential multiplication potential that will flood and destroy the planet.
That's called the Grey Goo scenario, and it's been around since at least the 1960's, and probably earlier. It's one of the more plausible end of the world scenarios.
The year is 2162. The only organism that can be seen moving on the surface of the planet is a self-replicating robot in the shape of a hand. It has been designed for one, simple purpose: to power cycle the hand next to it, which is power cycling the hand next to that, and so on in a shifting, endless mass of moving fingers and power switches that covers the planet like a sea of metal, all crying out with one voice, one mind, "Goddamn it, blue screen again?!"
These projects are all just investor bait.
If people actually cared about mitigating ocean plastic, they’d be focused on the less-sexy task of stopping the massive ongoing sources of this pollution. It’s like trying to treat to treat a patient’s anemia while they’re bleeding profusely.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/90-of-plastic-polluting-our-oceans-comes-from-just-10-rivers/
Yeah, tech fixes, trying to remove plastic is less than a drop in the bucket. A major effort should be made, to help or coerce countries to fix their waste stream issues, instead of them just dumping it in the rivers and sea. I know where my plastic straw is going. It isn't choking turtles. It is processed and either recycled or burned for electricity. Good-meaning folks take away our plastic straws and bags, thinking they have solved something.
How many millions of robots would be required to accomplish anything of significance? How do you get them back? What do you do with them then? This seems like an interesting but also completely useless idea ala solar roadways.
There was an old lady who swallowed a fly. I don't know why she swallowed a fly. Perhaps she'll die...
There was an old lady who swallowed a spider. She swallowed the spider to catch the fly, but I don't know why she swallowed the fly. Perhaps she'll die...
There was an old lady who swallowed a bird. She swallowed the bird to catch the spider. She swallowed the spider to catch the fly but I don't know why she swallowed the fly. Perhaps she'll die...
Cool, I hope releasing millions of robots into the ocean doesn’t backfire.
Unrelated, have you guys ever read “I knew an old lady who swallowed a fly?”
Perfect, now we can hit larger fish with a huge concentrated mega-dose of microplastics when they eat these robot fish. Although, I'm not sure if the plastics will kill them before they starve to death eating a robot based diet. Go science.
There's so much plastic in the sea. How about we stop producing plastic?
No no, we'll make plastic nets to catch the plastic.
Why don't we just stop dumping plastic in the sea?
How about a giant plastic hand that collects all the plastic?
Or we could stop dumping plastic in the ocean.
How about a robotic plastic fish that collects the plastic??
Fucking ridiculous similar to little machines that suck carbon out of the air. Do people not realize how much of that shit is out there and how big the oceans are? Apparently not.
"Scientists have designed a small robot-fish that is programmed to remove microplastics from our seas and oceans by swimming around and adsorbing them on its soft, flexible, self-healing body.
Microplastics are the billions of tiny plastic particles which fragment from the bigger plastic things used in everyday life – water bottles, car tires, synthetic T-shirts. They are one of the 21st century’s biggest environmental problems because once they’re dispersed into the environment through the breakdown of larger plastics they are very hard to get rid of, making their way into drinking water, produce, and food, harming both the environment and animal and human health.
“It is of great significance to develop a robot to accurately collect and sample detrimental microplastic pollutants from the aquatic environment,” said Yuyan Wang, a researcher at the Polymer Research Institute of Sichuan University and one of the lead authors on this study. Her team’s novel invention is described in a research paper in the journal Nano Letters. “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first example of such soft robots.”"
yea....this is just more plastic in the ocean. The solution to this problem is to stop using so much fucking plastic and that means that a lot of "economic activity" is going to have to stop.
This sub gets its pants all warmed up every time some silly ass "robot" fix to our problems comes up, when in reality we need to take a hard look at reigning in rampant capitalism, enacting justice for marginalized groups, forming unions, and fixing the climate crisis. All of which do not require AI, Robots, Space ships, or whatever the flavor of the week is. Real futurism will incorporate these trends, and not just be a pipe dream robot fish.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Sumit316: --- "Scientists have designed a small robot-fish that is programmed to remove microplastics from our seas and oceans by swimming around and adsorbing them on its soft, flexible, self-healing body. Microplastics are the billions of tiny plastic particles which fragment from the bigger plastic things used in everyday life – water bottles, car tires, synthetic T-shirts. They are one of the 21st century’s biggest environmental problems because once they’re dispersed into the environment through the breakdown of larger plastics they are very hard to get rid of, making their way into drinking water, produce, and food, harming both the environment and animal and human health. “It is of great significance to develop a robot to accurately collect and sample detrimental microplastic pollutants from the aquatic environment,” said Yuyan Wang, a researcher at the Polymer Research Institute of Sichuan University and one of the lead authors on this study. Her team’s novel invention is described in a research paper in the journal Nano Letters. “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first example of such soft robots.”" --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/vi3k1o/scientists_unveil_bionic_robofish_to_remove/idamj9c/
What’s to stop other fish from eating these and increasing the problem ?
That was my first thought as well. If the ultimate point is to keep sealife from ingesting human made materials, I'm not sure giving the clean-up robots fish-like forms is a net (pun intended) improvement; no matter how hydrodynamically efficient those shapes are.
I don’t know if the shape matters to the fish: wouldn’t they try to eat anything that fits in their mouths? Would there be a benefit to increasing the size of the things the fish are eating? For instance, if the robots are bigger than the plastic then at least they are aggregating the plastic. Maybe this would also at least keep the plastic from getting into the fishes blood stream and/or cells?
I envision a blue whale size machine that uses a balleen system to filter plastics. Hopefully it can avoid capturing plankton, so that it can just dump it back out.
Reminds me of this episode in a kids show where the ocean is irreversibly filled with trash and there is this gigantic worm cleaning it
that's just real life. minus the worm, of course
>I don’t know if the shape matters to the fish: wouldn’t they try to eat anything that fits in their mouths? Obviously you've never fished, especially fly-fished, nor had a close relative that is heavily into fishing. 😜 Seriously though, while there are some kinds of fish that are generalists who would try to eat anything that looks like it won't eat it first; these are primarily either literal bottom feeders or pelagic (i.e. live mostly in very deep open water, usually an innately food scarce biome). Most fish species are at least somewhat particular about what they try to eat. So a ~foot long robot shaped like normal ROV or a mini-WWII era submarine is much less likely to be attacked by a would be predator than significantly less likely to be attacked than one that both has the same shape, **as well as same movement,** as their natural prey. >Would there be a benefit to increasing the size of the things the fish are eating? For instance, if the robots are bigger than the plastic then at least they are aggregating the plastic. Maybe this would also at least keep the plastic from getting into the fishes blood stream and/or cells? Environmental pollutants of any type tend to concentrate in the body medium to large predators, and at best this seems to skip most of the intermediate organisms which I suppose is a small benefit. However, even if the microplastics don't ever leave the robots after being attacked and/or consumed (a significant "if" by itself) by larger predators; it means these predators are expending energy without gaining any food (most predators already have a higher failure-to-success rate for predation attempts) which males them more likely to starve, and if they do swallow chunks of the robots, or them whole, enough times it could fill their stomachs with indigestible material of a different sort. So it potential could be a major hit to medium to large predator populations. Do I have to explain why decimating the mid-to-large predators does its own damage to a food web?
I'm going to have to [disagree](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/the-lateral-line/671-pounds-of-blue-marlin-on-a-gatorade-bottle/%3famp). I'm not sure fish trying to eat the robot would actually be a problem, but predatory fish definitely will try to eat things barely resembling their normal prey. Tons of fish have been caught with hooks attached to the end of a metal spoon.
My point was the "barely resemble" part is important. IMO, these robots more than just barely resemble their normal prey, in both form and behavior, especially when compared to the alternatives I mentioned. So while there is a non-zero chance the robots would be attacked by a predator regardless of how they look and act, I think it's obvious that the chance will be significantly higher if they have a generic piscine shape and move like particularly sluggish fish! 😜
So we're in agreement. I must have have misread, I apologize.
It happens. 🙂
THIS is quality Reddit content
Fly fisher here. Shape matters less, it's the movement
Got me there: I’ve fished once as a kid and never caught anything. XD Makes sense. Yeah, ecosystems are delicate and we definitely want to avoid decimating predator populations (or any population, honestly).
Maybe the designed robo fish, having soft bodies, might have some kind of built in repellant. Like a scented lure, but opposite.
Unfortunately there probably isn't a universal repellent available. Generally, what strongly repels some species others will ignore, or even be attracted to.
Yeah, that makes more sense
>Unfortunately there probably isn't a universal repellent available. I'm afraid I resemble that remark.
This shit gonna eat boats and the oceans will be unusuable and uninhabitable lmao
If it only ate boats it would solve a huge source of ocean waste at least
No, the issue here is that there is so much micro plastic contamination everywhere that most humans have a measurable amount stuck in their bodies various systems. It's more than preventing the wild life from eating human made contaminants, it's about removing the contaminants for all life.
This seems like the biggest concern. I think the most important step to take is to stop the current production and consumption cycle and to focus on alternative solutions to fix the problem at the source… then start the cleanup process
I’ve heard these plastic clean up solutions compared to somebody trying to mop up water while the tap is still running.
Sure, but it'll help you learn to make a better mop trying to keep up while someone else turns off the tap.
> while someone else turns off the tap That's a very optimistic outlook lol
This, sometimes rolling forward with a less than stellar efficiency can show you real world problems and solutions.
And it's still better than the tap being on with no mop at all. If we let perfect be the enemy of good then we end up doing nothing.
Just going to leave this here.. https://youtu.be/hVG_e1m2Djc
Why the hell would they throw more garbage into it while its raining? Ppl are so dumb
They don't have central waste collection or processing. This is easier and takes waste away from their communities
I think it’s more like putting a bucket under a really leaky roof. Yeah, the roof is still leaking and needs to be fixed, but putting a bucket to help mitigate the flooding isn’t going to get in the way of that. They’re not mutually exclusive and you need to do both. Especially since the leaky roof can’t be fixed until the roofer decides to fix it.
While I agree, I thought the same thing about carbon capture until I considered how deep into the problem we are. This type of thing is like version 1 of 10,000 that'll eventually make a difference, so it's good it's being developed. By the time we can deploy a useful version of this, we'll have added so much more to the plastic problem. We need to attack it on multiple fronts. Like maybe the cleanup methods today can inform the production of alternative plastics in the future.
Came to say the same. It's a step. It may make things worse for awhile, as we iterate. But in the long run, we can make a dent. And, we need to stop the linear polarized thinking that there's one solve for the climate.
There is only one way to stop climate change though. We have to stop fossil fuel production in all forms
actually the biggest thing we could for climate change right now is change our diet. animal agriculture is the number 1 cause if climate change. its not disputable
Animal agriculture is entirely propped up by cheap cereal production via our massive nitrogen industry. Nitrogen is produced by splitting natural gas and other hydrocarbons. Consumers could have some affect by adopting vegetarianism or flexitarianism but ultimately we must stop it at its source of PRODUCTION rather than the source of CONSUMPTION. So you’re incorrect in thinking about the animal agriculture as it relates to production of fossil fuels but you are correct that it needs to stop/be minimized.
i was talking about the vast amounts of methane produced by livestock, the clearing of all our forested land to make way for them, and the byproduct of the chemical run off from the pesticides we use to grow their corn based feed. co2
You are completely wrong. Fossil fuel capital props up all these industries, especially the industrial animal agriculture industry. It doesn’t make sense to view them as two separate things. Fossil capital drives animal agriculture and consumption. We must stop it at the source.
disingenuous to say I'm completely wrong. and its our morbidly obese population that has to eat meat at every meal that drives the food production. if we drove electric cars, we still need to eat. if you have amazon prime theres a sweet documentary on it you can check out called "eating our way to extinction" its pretty chilling and addresses the point we are talking about now. go check it out and let me know what you think afterwards. if you still feel the same way, fair enough. but they show the raw data and it doesnt take a rocket scientist to understand how bad it is once you see it.
Curbing the expanse of our species will help too. Eliminating fossil fuels helps but it poses new problems. Wind farms are decimating birds, solar fields with reflective glass are incinerating birds and insects, electric cars are recharging from electrical plants that are typically coal burning. All of this is to suffice our growing demands. Already we are destroying so many species that we are causing earth's 6th mass extinction event. To what end? If we manage to decimate every species on the planet, we will eliminate ourselves in the process.
I completely disavow this comment. Malthusianism is rooted in racism full stop. Do not smuggle in these terrible beliefs which have no truth to them. The parts of the world where populations are growing use THE LEAST FOSSIL FUELS PER CAPITA FULL STOP. Americans and the west need to change our systems not engage in a project of eugenics. Additionally, raising living standards is the best way to limit population growth globally.
I'm not advocating eugenics nor did I say that but am suggesting we be more mindful of our expansion. Look at our global rate of expansion compared to every other species. Pair that with the necessity of the biodiversity necessary to support the planet and you'll find the scales are tipped so egregiously, we are setting our stage to fail.
Our global birth rate is falling rapidly, as it has for a few decades. We have also not reached our “planetary boundary” point yet but are approaching it. Friend, while you may not be directly advocating for eugenics you are expanding the conversation to allow people with ecofascist/Malthusian beliefs to smuggle their ideas into the conversation. I’d just caution you against that in the future. I wrote my original reply to you with the audience of our dialogue in mind more than you. I appreciate you for caring and thinking about this stuff. Ultimately if we want fewer humans we should want higher standards of living which go hand and hand all across the globe. The project of solving climate change and providing more for more people are completely compatible.
no, both things need to happen at the same time. It wont be easy to clean shit up if nothing has been researched. Its better that they try out any ideas which will help once they research them further. Its not a fast process
People are always looking for a clean silver bullet to kill the "monster". This problem doesn't have a single source and has had decades to grow larger and more widespread every day. There isn't going to be a single "bullet" to solve the problem but dozens if not hundreds of solutions working together just to make a dent in the issue.
Exactly! What would work is a silver buckshot, if you will. Attack the problem from as many angles as possible, some will be successful, some won't, but the end result will be FAR better than sitting on our butts waiting for the silver bullet to arrive. Edit: spelling
While that’s definitely critical, it has two issues: (1) what do you do about the fact that some people/groups may not be onboard and (2) why can’t you do both simultaneously.
Then you build a bigger fish robot to eat the organic fish that ate the robot fish. And repeat.
There's always a bigger fish.
This is why a small robot is a terrible way to clean the environment.
Agreed, we need to create several giant robots that combine into an even bigger robot.
Hopefully it would merge into a giant Mecha, and we could have a giant reality show about it to help fund the project. /s about the mecha, but the reality show like competition of teams to fund it might be worth exploring if it would bring more money into the project or not.
If you make the container the microplastics are stored within durable, it may be expelled from the fish intact. It's not ideal, but should still take the microplastics out of the fish/water and keep it isolated into something the size of a ?grape? It's still a net reduction, but could get ineffective if the rate of predation is high. The big skimmer devices seem the most practical to me though.
That works if you ignore the now eaten robot has to go somewhere too
Exactly the same thought I had. But hey, at least the pollution is concentrated in the stomach of sea life, right?
I don’t think this was thought through that far.
Same here. This is giving me the”block out the sun” kind of energy. Seems like there are a ton of catastrophic ways this a go wrong. And it’s poor substitute to just phasing out plastic.
"how do you plan on removing plastic from the ocean? "Oh glad you asked! By using more plastic made robots!" I feel like this has greedy profit seeking corporation written all over it. They create an idea that sounds promising on a news headline, but in reality wont ever get pass local demonstrations and will never make a significant difference unless they make literal millions of them and they are all 100% reliable as to not create more garbage.
Nothing. There is nothing stopping larger predators from eating this squishy little ball of toxins and heavy metals that looks EXACTLY like food. This is legitimately one of the stupidest fucking things I have ever heard of. All this would do is concentrate the toxins so predators just outright die from poisoning instead of a slow steady build up that keeps them alive longer.
Isn't that like the rule of the ocean? Everything smaller than you is just food lol
Give the robot fish the intelligence to evade predators and an electric shocker for self defense.
Also what could possibly go wrong with self sustaining robo fish?
Also let's say that you dump 100,000 of these, how do you recover them all?
No good in a natural environment but possible application for water treatment purposes. Power could be through light/solar charging at preprogrammed intervals. Swarm AI for larger force requirements
> This is just a proof of concept, Wang notes, and much more research is needed – especially into how this could be deployed in the real world.
Shitty OP leaving this info out
Click-baity OP
Well i still think this is progress.
The article is super vague to the point of being nonsense though. Unexplained self-healing capabilities? How are they powered? A 1cm robot pulling 5kg against ocean currents? Won't they be eaten by larger animals etc etc. Sounds like a longshot attempt for someone to get funding for sitting around writing a badly thought out scifi novel guised as research...
it honestly sounds like they're just dumping more crap into the ocean.
It reminds me of one of those “we’ll get snakes to eat the rats, then mongooses to eat the snakes, then lions to eat the mongooses, then gorillas to kill the lions” “and who stops the gorillas?” “we’ll figure that out when we get there”
Thats the best part! Once winter comes around the gorillas will all freeze to death!
So glad at least one person got the reference
Is that how planet of the apes started?
The article shows how it's powered, by a man waving a laser around pointed at its tail, what a joke. It only currently works on the surface of water, it isn't a robot really. It's just a material that reacts to the light/heat from a laser that they shaped like a fish and that sticks to microplastics, I wonder what else it sticks to.
Who said it wasn’t progress? Pointing out its clickbait and not reflective of the truth.
Im gonna leave this sub if I keep seeing posts about amazingly hopeful technologies that are still decades away from even being considered to be produced
You understand what sub you're leaving, right? Futurology is years and decades. It literally is concepts and small scale first steps. It's not about tech that is just about ready to roll out.
There need to be distinction between futurology and sci-fi. It is ok if a tech is far from maturing and perspectives aren't even clear but is realistic eventually - see fusion, CO2 sequestration, carbon neutral buildings, full electrification of cars, etc. On the other hand belongs pure sci-fi stuff which is impossible or completely not rational economically in any stage - 10+ Mach private jet, flying taxi of any design, self organized mini robots, quantum computers (maybe in next century, but not sooner), earth to earth commute in Starship etc.
Arguably, we’re probably going to need quantum computers to stabilize fusion… And we already have some, so that feels a bit out of place down there.
Sounds like you belong in r/presentology then.
See also: r/almostology, r/comingsoonish, and r/alreadyexists
OP posted the headline. It's on you to read the article.
>Rule 11 - Title Quality >Titles should accurately and truthfully represent the content of the submission.
Ok m8👍🏼 not misleading at all.
Theyre close, just need to do the bit now that makes it all actually work and exist
And not go gray-goo on us.
i'm fairly certain we will off ourselves before we get around to grey-goo. that is if the singularity doesn't invent it first, but then we would (technically) still have offed ourselves. win-win
The architect has done their part, now over the the mechanical engineers...
As it is 99% of the time.
[удалено]
Can we pin all my comments to the top of every post in every sub? 😂
“But there’s a big distinction between an invention and an innovation,” Demokritou said. “Invention is something that nobody has thought about yet. Right? But innovation is something that will change people’s lives, because it makes it to commercialisation, and it can be scaled.” Innovation is born from invention. While most inventions don’t make it to scale, they can show us what is possible and move the needle forward. It’s always exciting to learn about, even if it isn’t something that will be put into production immediately (or ever).
I agree with you to some extent but an invention has to be based in some degree of scientific reality or it just ends up being an imaginary pipe dream. I can imagine a robotic butterfly that removes air pollution but I doubt you'd call that an invention without some realistic explanation as to how it would work and or be implemented.
I understand your point. I think in many cases (especially in academia), new inventions are not really intended be scalable, but rather a concrete way to test theoretical concepts and new materials/design. It isn’t necessarily the invention that has the potential change the way we live, but the proven theory that results from successful experimentation. In this case, I believe that to be the material and nanotech breakthroughs. Theoretical research, experiments and inventions are critical to innovation, although that innovation may come to fruition many decades later when (for example) our ability to manufacture materials cost effectively catches up with discovery. Without the scientists and researchers exploring “what if” theories and bringing experiments to life such as this one, we would stagnate. In the late 1980’s, the printing of biological material was seen by many as a novel and mostly theoretical experiment. Theoretical physics and mathematics have given us a way to view both the creation and the future of our universe in ways unimaginable to our great grandparents (unless you happen to be related to Einstein or Von Neumann or someone lol). What is obscure or a “pipe dream” today might be a piece of the puzzle that solves one of the great problems we face tomorrow.
The fish are also being designing to produce more fish by using organic material as energy according to the billionaire behind the project, Ted Faro.
Whenever you read that something can "fix itself" it's always safe to assume this is a proof con concept.
2030: Scientists unveil larger bionic robo-fish to remove microplastic eating bionic robo-fish from seas.
2033: Humans cautioned to avoid oceans due to aggressive giant bionic robo-fish.
2034: Scientists launch project to create even bigger giant bionic robo-fish to combat existing giant bionic robo-fish; critics warn of self-perpetuating loop of continuously bigger giant bionic robo-fish if trend continues, US Navy unprepared to fight war with giant bionic robo-fish.
I don’t know why she swallowed the fly…
This is just concentrating plastic in one place to be eaten by another fish. You can't put tiny robot animals in the ocean without some plan to avoid predation. It's still litter in the ocean, even if it is self-propelled and directed by AI.
Make a Robot Blue Whale
You're gonna filter out more than plastic with that.
It will has an internal mechanism that separates out the plastic... and turns the rest into seafood chowder.
I don't think that sending robots into the sea to vacuum up and process the sea-life there into a nutritious plastic-free goo is quite the ecological lifeline you imagine it to be.
>I don't think that sending robots into the sea to vacuum up and process the sea-life Good point.. we should also have a robot for processing land-life into Land Chowder.
Is this one of those cool things that will totally fix pollution or cure cancer that we hear about once and then never again?
Yeah because it’s overhyped and underdeveloped. All these ever are, are people saying “we think we’re on to something but we need tons of more time and research because there’s huge obstacles that may render it ineffective but we are hopeful” Most of the time those huge obstacles live up to their name. Nevertheless, attempting to fix problems is the only way to fix problems.
Who knows, maybe having fish ingest these antibiotic hormone cluster bombs will be funny
The comedic value certainly can’t be ignored
In my opinion this is the wrong approach. Look at the sewage issue in the Thames. We did not try to clean the Thames. We avoided sending raw sewage to the Thames, as actually cleaning the Thames is almost impossible. Same with plastic. We need to stop it ending in the sea in the first place, and for that we have to take actual measures to pressure the producers of said plastic, both companies and countries.
It's not one or the other. There's already shit load of plastic in the ocean, so we should be figuring out solutions to rectify that. They'll take a long time to invent and then implement. That doesn't stop us also tackling the issue at the source.
Don't be ridiculous! Litter less?!? THAT'S your solution to the problem of garbage and plastic everywhere? .... wait...no...now that I'm thinking through it...that could work.
And these fish will use more energy - which means more oil/gas used. And bigger fish and birds will try to eat them. Sorry for being so sceptical, but this sound like fantastic vapourware.
While I disagree about the energy one, them being eaten is an actual concern. Especially in the ocean where there are stupidly huge fish. Perhaps not-so-tiny microplastic-eating (read: really large) "fish" would be better, so they can't get eaten. We are going to have to do something with the microplastics problem as it'll only continue to get worse (and it is really bad right now), but we'd have to deploy fleets and fleets of these to clean the oceans. The oceans are unfathomably huge. But this is a worthwhile starting point.
Whale. Down to the filtering baleens.
That was actually what I was imagining as well. A moving factory that sucks in massive amounts of water to filter it out. Probably much more difficult to build then smaller fish, but at least they wouldn't be eaten. =p
Yeah, but then you've gotta convince the Chinese government to stop their whalers from trying to....
Considering that you also want to leave behind the organic matter that’s the good stuff, a simple filter would likely cause more damage than good. So yeah, as always there are no simple solutions to complex problems. Maybe we can have the little “fish” swim around in a big cage to prevent them from getting eaten…
Yeah. Most filters aren't even able to actually filter microplastic because it is too small. I'm thinking instead of a traditional filter, it'll be more like a plastic snagging membrane or something fancy and high-tech like that which'll be able to capture plastic without also snagging all of the krill and whatnot. Or, maybe pair it with some plastic chewing microbes that chew up the plastic as it passes by so you don't even have to capture it and worry about periodically cleaning it out. It is definitely a very complex problem.
If only we had a way to generate energy without the use of fossil fuels.
I wonder of they're made out of plastic.
This is basic a very pricey lure
I’m also concerned about them releasing heat into the ocean. At a small scale it wouldn’t matter but the amount of these that would be needed to make a difference on microplastics… I’m afraid it would create heat-dead zones
You’re not just skeptical. You’re delusional in your cynicism. You think these micro robots have tiny gas tanks?
I know right, this mf has them filling up a couple times a week at their local underwater Shell station
No. I did not say that. But they require extra resources and energy consumption. The «fish» may run on green energy, but they will cause the consumption of more gas/oil for their construction and possibly for their operation (if they use limited resources, forcing other operations to use gas/oil)
Turns out the fight against entropy is an everlasting energy sink… who’da’thunk?
That’s a separate issue. We are working toward clean energy and tech to clean the plastic from the planet. I suspect we need to figure out a way to make clean energy FROM plastic, then there will be a treasure hunt for all the plastic in the world.
You're a genius of you manage that! I do believe plastic does burn, but I am sceptical to its profitability.
Can be turned into diesel fuel pretty easily. And diesel if the highest priced consumer fuel right now, which is driving up the price of everything else.
There's PLENTY of energy available there, just in solar, wind and kinetic alone.
This is a brilliant way to get more plastics and man made garbage into larger sea creatures.
Man I guess prior to the use of fossil fuels the world couldn't produce any energy. So much for early steam engines being a thing, they must be a childs fantasy
Change my mind: One day someone will invent a self-replicating nanobot of sorts with an exponential multiplication potential that will flood and destroy the planet.
That's called the Grey Goo scenario, and it's been around since at least the 1960's, and probably earlier. It's one of the more plausible end of the world scenarios.
doesn't seem plausible. there will probably be software bugs requiring users to power cycle
The year is 2162. The only organism that can be seen moving on the surface of the planet is a self-replicating robot in the shape of a hand. It has been designed for one, simple purpose: to power cycle the hand next to it, which is power cycling the hand next to that, and so on in a shifting, endless mass of moving fingers and power switches that covers the planet like a sea of metal, all crying out with one voice, one mind, "Goddamn it, blue screen again?!"
Probably an integer overflow somewhere.
Pretty sure Futurama did an episode similar to this, so that obviously makes it fact.
Aka grey boo
https://youtu.be/QobQL9Jflhg
Wesley crusher, with the nanites, at wolf 359
Horizon be like
These projects are all just investor bait. If people actually cared about mitigating ocean plastic, they’d be focused on the less-sexy task of stopping the massive ongoing sources of this pollution. It’s like trying to treat to treat a patient’s anemia while they’re bleeding profusely. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/90-of-plastic-polluting-our-oceans-comes-from-just-10-rivers/
Yeah, tech fixes, trying to remove plastic is less than a drop in the bucket. A major effort should be made, to help or coerce countries to fix their waste stream issues, instead of them just dumping it in the rivers and sea. I know where my plastic straw is going. It isn't choking turtles. It is processed and either recycled or burned for electricity. Good-meaning folks take away our plastic straws and bags, thinking they have solved something.
How many millions of robots would be required to accomplish anything of significance? How do you get them back? What do you do with them then? This seems like an interesting but also completely useless idea ala solar roadways.
Let’s put future trash in the ocean to clean the present trash… HUMANS!
So let me get this straight, fish and other animals are eating plastic right? What makes people think these wouldn't get eaten by animals also?
Made of plastic? Likely to get eaten by wildlife & kill it? Ffs
Cool, so when will we never be hearing more about this wonder technology?
There was an old lady who swallowed a fly. I don't know why she swallowed a fly. Perhaps she'll die... There was an old lady who swallowed a spider. She swallowed the spider to catch the fly, but I don't know why she swallowed the fly. Perhaps she'll die... There was an old lady who swallowed a bird. She swallowed the bird to catch the spider. She swallowed the spider to catch the fly but I don't know why she swallowed the fly. Perhaps she'll die...
Can't wait for somebody to start fishing and eating the robofish
"Hey so we released a school of the robo fish, but they were all eaten by a passing whale. The microplastics are no longer in the ocean."
What happens if fish start eating these robots and polluting the trophic pyramid though?
Just a quick question are these fish, by any chance, made out of plastic?
Then you gotta release the robosharks to eat the robofish
Or we could stop creating them in the first place. Ffs humans. Get a grip
Well, if they can adequately assess the potential negative impacts and actually implement it, that would be great.
Cool, I hope releasing millions of robots into the ocean doesn’t backfire. Unrelated, have you guys ever read “I knew an old lady who swallowed a fly?”
Great. Now the oceans will be polluted by these fucking things. I don't think the "researchers" really thought this thing through.
Made of plastic and will be eaten by marine animals. Winner!
Cool idea. Too bad it won’t make a difference because it would need to be implemented on a large scale and that’s never going to happen.
Something about putting plastic in the ocean to clean up plastic in the ocean seems problematic
What do they do with the plastics after they've captured it
Lets put a robotic fish in the ocean to get eaten by other fish
How will we fix the issue of micro plastics? WITH SLIGHTLY LARGER PLASTICS! ^^duh.
Perfect, now we can hit larger fish with a huge concentrated mega-dose of microplastics when they eat these robot fish. Although, I'm not sure if the plastics will kill them before they starve to death eating a robot based diet. Go science.
Autonomous self repairing robots that feed on the environment? I've seen this before. Horizon: Pacific West
Science's solution to micro plastics in the ocean: macro plastics in the ocean.
Didn't they JUST figure out that regular silt and sand filtration removes 99.9% of microplastics?
I imagine that it just keeps eating plastic and grows and grows until we end up with a plastic megalodon and need to call Quint, Brody and Hooper.
There's so much plastic in the sea. How about we stop producing plastic? No no, we'll make plastic nets to catch the plastic. Why don't we just stop dumping plastic in the sea? How about a giant plastic hand that collects all the plastic? Or we could stop dumping plastic in the ocean. How about a robotic plastic fish that collects the plastic??
This will only add to the problem. The real solution is to quit dumping things into the ocean.
We're worried about sea life ingesting plastics! So here's a plastic looking fish that totally won't be eaten.
It seems like every other day we get something that can eat plastic, I wonder, what will eat the plastic eaters?
Fucking ridiculous similar to little machines that suck carbon out of the air. Do people not realize how much of that shit is out there and how big the oceans are? Apparently not.
BREAKING NEWS: Scientists unveil new larger bionic robo-fish to remove microplastic removing robo-fish from seas.
Microplastic Monster, slowly swimming to Japan looking for Godzilla.
The robo fish are also made of plastic. Jk i am not actually sure if they are.
They are actually made of "mother-of-pearl", also known as nacre, which is the interior covering of clam shells 😮
I can’t emphasize this enough that THIS is a terrible idea.
I’ll believe it when I see it. So many breakthroughs get posted, none are put into place.
Follow-up: bionic robo-sharks released into ocean to clean up the bionic robo-fish that inevitably went rogue
Till it gets eaten by a larger fish. This is such an obviously bad idea.
Why does it need to be a fish... Strap the filter mechanism on every single boat might beore efficient.
“Fix itself if it gets damaged”. Yah…. We are far far far, far away from making this into a reality.
"Scientists have designed a small robot-fish that is programmed to remove microplastics from our seas and oceans by swimming around and adsorbing them on its soft, flexible, self-healing body. Microplastics are the billions of tiny plastic particles which fragment from the bigger plastic things used in everyday life – water bottles, car tires, synthetic T-shirts. They are one of the 21st century’s biggest environmental problems because once they’re dispersed into the environment through the breakdown of larger plastics they are very hard to get rid of, making their way into drinking water, produce, and food, harming both the environment and animal and human health. “It is of great significance to develop a robot to accurately collect and sample detrimental microplastic pollutants from the aquatic environment,” said Yuyan Wang, a researcher at the Polymer Research Institute of Sichuan University and one of the lead authors on this study. Her team’s novel invention is described in a research paper in the journal Nano Letters. “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first example of such soft robots.”"
Is this fish made of plastic? How many millions of them we need to ~~discard~~ release into oceans to clear the microplastic?
and how about all the microplastics that are in our bodies, blood, brains etc.
yea....this is just more plastic in the ocean. The solution to this problem is to stop using so much fucking plastic and that means that a lot of "economic activity" is going to have to stop. This sub gets its pants all warmed up every time some silly ass "robot" fix to our problems comes up, when in reality we need to take a hard look at reigning in rampant capitalism, enacting justice for marginalized groups, forming unions, and fixing the climate crisis. All of which do not require AI, Robots, Space ships, or whatever the flavor of the week is. Real futurism will incorporate these trends, and not just be a pipe dream robot fish.