In the same way as cleaning a sink filled with cold chicken fat with soap and hot water helps deal with it, I suppose.
Once again demonstrating your true mentality.
You don't give a shit about the environment, you only care about that near you.
If you can push the problem somewhere else you are happy.
If you could live in luxury, completely destroying the entire rest of the world, you would be happy, as long as it doesn't effect you.
That is the kind of mentality that lead to the deforestation of Haiti.
Yes, there are degreasers
Or you use a grease trap.
With that grease then collected and recycled into compost or the like.
If oil were as bad as all that, shouldn't all fats and greases also be in a lesser list of environmental disasters?
No, for a very important distinction.
These fats and oils from things like birds that you are appealing to are structures currently found in life on Earth, which other life on Earth can easily break down and digest.
But life on Earth cannot easily break down the fossil fuel oil.
And the fats and oils from these birds haven't been underground collecting heavy metals like fossil fuel oil has.
You delude yourself into thinking only you care about the environment, and nobody else can have opinions.
No, we don't.
We recognise YOU don't care about the environment. As you have repeatedly shown.
Even saying you don't care about European trees.
But you have no solution at all for the Great Pacific Ocean Trash Thingy.
Notice how you continue to deflect?
The biggest problem with it is collecting it.
Some people like to think of it as a just a massive solid island. But it isn't.
It covers roughly 1.6 million square km, and as an upper bound has roughly 129 000 tons of plastic, or 129 million kg.
That is roughly 80.6 kg per square km, or 80 mg per square m.
That is virtually nothing and would take a lot of resources to collect it.
And even if you managed to collect it all, and it burnt just like oil does, just how long do you think it would last?
Well a single barrel is ~159 L of oil, which is well over 100 kg, or 0.1 tonnes, so being generous, at 10 barrels per ton, that would be 12.9 thousand barrels.
The US alone uses roughly 20 million barrels daily.
So if you cleaned up the entire great pacific garbage patch, you wouldn't even have enough to burn to last a day.
Depending on what you are using, it is almost certainly going to take more energy to go and collect that plastic than you get from burning it.
So if you try to collect it using ships which run on an oil based fuel, you will be burning more oil than you would collect plastic to use as fuel.
Your solution is clearly not thought out.
You have an idea which sounds like it would be wonderful, but is actually entirely impractical and not a solution at all.
The only thing this is a solution for is cleaning up the plastic.
It is NOT a solution for energy as it would take more energy to clean it up than you get from it.
You have two poor solutions for providing energy
No, there are many renewable options. And it is known that they only provide power at certain times.
And these options are vastly better than continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Even if you wanted to pretend there is no option for energy storage, it would still be better to use those renewable technologies when we can and only rely on the fossil fuels when the renewables aren't providing enough.
I noticed you said, "How does spraying with water help?" and not "No, you use cat litter/baking soda/clay/etc."
Because that doesn't help either.
That still isn't breaking down the oil.
It doesn't even remove it from a surface. Instead it just absorbs pools of it, and not very well.
But most importantly, it is because this shows your mentality.
You don't give a shit about the environment, because spraying it with water doesn't help it at all. Instead it just pushes the problem somewhere else where you don't need to think about it.
You don't have solutions, you just gripe at people who do something
And here you again show your hypocrisy.
You object to the idea of "doing something" in the form of renewable energy, because it is untested, etc.
Yet what you propose has been tested and shown to not work, yet you continue to suggest it.
And you want to focus on the symptoms, rather than the cause.
Burning would at least produce waste energy.
That really depends, given the energy required to do so.
And we already have barrels of oil. Just letting them sit there is a ticking time bomb, you shouldn't pour it out, so the solution is to use the stuff.
Not if your "solution" is to continue collecting it.
That as a solution would be to shut down all oil wells and burn through the oil reserves, vowing to never collect another drop.