It’s public art singing use of recycled plastic to make a statement.
They have to be well built, and part of that budget was moving and installing massive sculptures into place and making sure they are secure and will stand up to being out doors and in public for a long time.
I hate when morons are dickheads about public art /rant.
Or, and hear me out here, they could use an actual fucking rock! $300k for a vanity project that could be provided for by nature is pretty stupid. But hey, that ground has to get it’s daily recommended amount of microplastics I guess, right?
Why use natural silicate when we have all this petroleum product!
I’ve never heard of a”tax payers association” that isn’t just a right wing scam group that’s really wants to defund education, healthcare and public services.
Don’t drink their koolaid.
Idk, I think more cities should invest in public art projects but this one seems pretty off. I get the concept. But if the idea is, “look what can be made with recycled plastic”, why not make a sculpture that’s actually interesting or pleasant to look at? It might’ve even been better if the rocks were just whatever color(s) they ended up being after they were made, but the based on images in the article it looks like they were made to literally just look like big rocks.
I feel like this project just does not achieve the goals it sets to meet. It’s not particularly thought provoking (unless there’s some sort of plaque that explains what it is, but who’s reading that?), and the visual appeal can be replicated at a fraction of the cost with something that does not need to be maintained and has zero chance of causing environmental harm.
The other articles with pictures are better exposed and shows that they are colorful and different from the granite looking image presented in this article.
That does make it a bit better then. I still think a traditional, non-rock sculpture could’ve been more appealing and the price tag does seem kind of steep. But then, I’ve never had to manufacture 3 massive boulders of plastic and figure out the logistics of placing them.
The article doesn’t load images for me, so here’s the photo from an archived copy:
What’s the problem?
The sun will probably break down the plastic, then rain will wash that plastic into the ground/nearby water/river/drinking water.
That’s my guess at how stupid it is to use plastic for this.
EDIT: Oh, and the fact that taxpayer money was used for this. PLASTIC.
Yeah, well, to be honest, I’m more concerned about the amount of plastic Coca-Cola, Nestlé and PepsiCo put into the environment, than the amount Saskatoon has put on display. But hey, different strokes.
It seems silly to me. The rocks don’t look like they’re made of plastic so unless someone already knows about them or finds a plaque to read about them they’re just going to assume that they’re big rocks. Which are pretty enough, don’t get me wrong, but rocks made of rock are also pretty, won’t potentially seep micro plastics into the ground, and don’t cost 100k a piece. If the point was to show off what can be made with recycled plastic, making something that looks naturally occurring and visually hiding the fact that it’s plastic is an odd way to do it.
