this post was submitted on 11 May 2024
486 points (98.4% liked)

science

15003 readers
156 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] misspacific@lemmy.blahaj.zone 68 points 7 months ago (3 children)

i am sure it will be "too expensive" for the next 30 to 40 years.

[–] skulblaka@startrek.website 45 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Much more likely that no company wants to use it no matter how much it costs because it degrades. We use plastic as a packing material specifically because it doesn't degrade and lasts forever.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 31 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

On the other hand, many of the things packaged in plastic also degrade, and might be fine for their safe shelf life in either biodegradable plastic or a container with that type of lining. Other liquids could be packaged in glass.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] IonAddis@lemmy.world 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, people forget that form follows function.

The parameters for making a USEFUL plastic that ALSO degrades gives a narrow band. Too degradable, and the function of fulfilling all the areas plastic is currently used for can't happen. Not degradable, and we have the current situation.

Plastic being is in use not simply to fuck the planet over or something, but because compared to other materials it has physical qualities that things like glass, wood, fabric, etc. don't have, that's why it's ended up in so many things. It's lightweight, strong, and "plastic" (that is to say, more easily shaped and molded than other materials, and I suspect there's a labor component too where maybe it needs less labor to shape and form).

I'm eventually going to write a story about a sci-fi world that's under quarantine because they successfully made a plastic-eating bacteria that never stops eating and breaking down plastic. Go there and most of your technology/clothes/etc. are eaten away. I might throw in wood, too...a world with no wood or plastic because the local bacteria is like, "Yum, yum, food!" and gets into every nook and cranny. I anticipate I'll have to do a lot of thinking to figure out how drastically technology would change under these parameters...I imagine a lot of it would be very "brutalist" because you'd have to rely on heavy-as-balls metals and cement and stone and such. Unless there's an Aluminum Future or something, where everything that can be made out of aluminum, can. Of course, there's also the byproducts of intense metals mining to think about on a fictional world like that. Anyway, lots of details to pick apart for worldbuilding.

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Don’t forget how it would mess with medical care, given how much medical equipment, especially things like gloves and masks that keep the doctors safe, are plastic.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Especially for packing would be good if it degrades after a determined time. That and bottles.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Yes, depends on what's the behavior of just sitting around outside, getting rained on a bit, sitting in a humid warehouse, exposed to bugs and rodents.

If hypothetically it only breaks down if shredded and mixed into compost, then it may be interesting. However in such a case you'd likely struggle to reliably identify and segregate it from the rest of the plastic waste stream to apply this special treatment without putting bad plastic into the mix.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fukhueson@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

https://blueviewfootwear.com/

Same people, they've been making biodegradable footwear for a bit now.

[–] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Why bother with that? If you need shoes to dissolve, regardless of the materials, just subject them to my foot sweat for a few months.

[–] jabjoe@feddit.uk 6 points 7 months ago

Until get externalities of plastic on to the up front cost. We kind of did it on plastic bags in the UK.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 50 points 7 months ago (2 children)

We have a lot of options for materials that completely decompose. The challenge is materials that only decompose when you want them to, and not while theyre sitting on store shelves

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That doesn't sound like a problem but a feature. We love new shiny things and wasting things.

I think if we find materials that breakdown in a useful way, it creates an incentive to make use of those products that have a shelf life. But more importantly creating a waste product that is beneficial.

I didn't know if the material science is there yet. But we need to figure out the best way to use these new materials to change industries.

If we can make something profitable, other people will do the hard part of adopting it and getting it out there.

My work produces sooo much waste. More than all of the staff combined will ever produce. And thats just my branch. We have hundreds of branches and being where we are in canada, we put some of the most amount of effort into recycling. Because its law, not because the company is willing to sacrifice profit by spending resources on anything that doesnt produce value in dollars.

We are small fry, and we arent in a monopoly

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think if we find materials that breakdown in a useful way, it creates an incentive to make use of those products that have a shelf life. But more importantly creating a waste product that is beneficial.

Cardboard. It composts well.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I go through more cardboard than garbage. It's not useful for many packaging or shipping solutions

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Right, generally whenever fluids or outdoor exposure is a concern. Because it decomposes.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (4 children)

In not sure what point you are making. But ill clarify that i was only trying to show that i did take the use of cardboard into consideration when i have the opinion i did.

That may not help or already be understood.

I dont know what happening

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I wonder why we shifted away from things like waxed paper milk cartons(like the small ones you'd get in school) and waxed butcher paper?

Is waxed paper/cardboard product really that much more expensive than plastic in terms of packaging?

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Here in Germany, all milk is still distributed in cardboard packages

[–] maniii@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

you mean cardboard packages with plastic linings ?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 38 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's not really a problem of lack of know-how, not even a problem of mass production (some industries made the transition for various reasons). It's a problem of a monopoly with dirty lobbies & gov subsidies.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Ah crap. 😩

[–] MaximilianKohler@lemmy.world 25 points 7 months ago (2 children)

There are already compostable alternatives to plastic bags being sold in stores like Target. I heard one of the issues is that people/companies refuse to pay more for them.

[–] KimjongTOOILL@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Sounds like something laws should fix

[–] buzz86us@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Exactly.. We need heavy focus on packaging.. plastic bags are barely a problem. I don't care if my food packaging is flashy.. I shouldn't be in the hook if this stuff doesn't decompose naturally. Meat is the most agriegious example why do we use heavy styrene?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] repungnant_canary@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Some of those "compostable" bags actually decompose into microplastics, so unfortunately they're not always better

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GrymEdm@lemmy.world 25 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I have a lot to say when reading a headline like this, but it boils down to: I really hope advances like this and EV's topple the fossil fuel industry that's hurting our planet.

[–] waddle_dee@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I agree, although, the pessimist in me says the Oil companies will find a way to kill it somehow.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Hate to say it, but i think it’s going to require violence to change their calculations.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Again?

I kid of course. The durable bioplastics from the 50s were made from plant cellulose.

[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] Slovene@feddit.nl 3 points 7 months ago

But they used to be too.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This is exciting news. Repubs pretend climate change is a myth because the oil industry has them in pocket. The smarter take would be to cheer for all the economic incentives to build new markets that are sustainable.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] masquenox@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago (32 children)

Oh, nice... techno-solution No. 456927493923990003038. You know... the same ole' techno-solutions they've been promising us will solve all the capitalism-instigated problems (ie, problems that aren't technological in nature) since at least the 80s?

I'll just go ahead and file this with the rest.

[–] cyd@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

since at least the 80s

People have been reliant on "ole’ techno-solutions" since the dawn of humanity 2 million years ago on the African savannah, long before capitalism was even a thing. Just sayin'.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Damn right, many techno-solutions already exist and have for a while but don't get used, usually due to bribery by the purveyors of the problem.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

No, usually because of the same reason most of these innovations don't work. They don't scale for one of 1000 reasons.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

load more comments (30 replies)
[–] thezeesystem@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Oil company says "no"

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Is it price-competitive with the oil-plastic? What usecases?

I want to be optimistic, but...

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

However, cost is currently a prohibitive issue to widespread use, the researchers said. While petroleum is readily available to siphon from the ground, widespread infrastructure for algae farming will be needed for plastics made of the bio-based polymer to become used en masse, Burkart said.

However, the process the researchers devised can also be applied to other plant-based material, Burkart said.

The researchers hope their new process can eventually be implemented widely for food packaging, Pomeroy said.

"But if you're going to ask me, 'Could we do this with anything?' I'm pretty sure we could do this with most anything," he said.

Sounds like an economy of scales problem, and the scale isn't there. Fixable, but not great.

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

No he said that in the video. It's a moot point. We are looking at doing something new. Will it be price competitive once it matures? Thats what we need to be asking.

Because if yes, immediately shift ALL subsidies from petroleum to whatever CAN effectively replace oil-plastic.

Whatever we do, it has to actually be effective regardless of cost. Cost come down as economies of scale sort themselves out.

Plastic is killing us anyway, what cost matters if we are all dead?

This is a problem NOW. Paying for it is a problem LATER.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Yes and they can make paper from kudzu. So - wrapped in paper then bioplastic and voilá. No more eternal waste.

[–] DriftinGrifter@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)

great wasnt the whole benefit of plastik that it doesent decompose tho?

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago

Depends on the use case.

Reading the article, it doesn't seem like it just disintegraties after 7 months, this material has to be under compositing conditions with a specific microbe due 7 months.

There are applications where this would probably be an unacceptable possibility, but I'd imagine the vast majority of single use plastics would be fine with this. Packaging may spend months or even years doing it's job, but it won't be under compost conditions during that time.

[–] filcuk@lemmy.zip 12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Not really. The reason plastic exploded in use is because it's cheap, durable, lightweight, and really versatile.
Look around you and consider what it would take to manufacture some plastic objects in another material.
Disposable things like packaging would be perfect to decompose after their lifetime is over.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

I do wish there was a sign whether this would be realistically cheap or not. That is the key as to whether it could be single use plastics.

In terms of the process, it looks like for now it needs to land in a compost heap with a specific microbe. I am concerned about the practical chance of this particular plastic finding it's way to the special compost heap without getting mixed in with other plastics.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

That was the selling point before we got into mass production of disposable plastic everything.

load more comments
view more: next ›