5 ms·

The problem with Biodegradable plastic is that it still requires a special process to break it down. You can’t just toss it in the ocean and have it magically b

The problem with Biodegradable plastic is that it still requires a special process to break it down. You can’t just toss it in the ocean and have it magically break down. Compostable materials are the ideal.

Alupis 8y ago
> The problem with Biodegradable plastic is that it still requires a special process to break it down That's not true, actually. From the article: > A peer-reviewed report of the work shows 91% biodegradation in a soil environment within 24 months, when tested in accordance with ISO 17556 > Under proper conditions, some biodegradable plastics can degrade to the point where microorganisms can completely metabolise them to carbon dioxide (and water). For example, starch-based bioplastics produced from sustainable farming methods could be almost carbon neutral.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  The ocean is not a soil environment; so it degrading well in soil doesn't necessarily help if it is a waste stream that ends up in the ocean.
  - Alupis 8y ago
    The article references starch-based bioplastics - and the ocean is quite an environment, filled with micro-organisms and minerals which readily decompose other organic materials. I don't see a reason we cannot create something that works in that environment too - however, the overwhelming majority of our plastic waste isn't going into the ocean; rather, it's going into landfills where it will sit for thousands of years.
    - njarboe 8y ago
      Things sitting in landfills are not a problem for the environment. It is producing them in the first place that causes environmental damage. Imagine everything going into a landfill as a resource our ancestors can mine in the future.
      - Alupis 8y ago
        > Things sitting in landfills are not a problem for the environment That's not true either. Toxins, leachate, and greanhouse gases are given off from landfills and leach into ground water, or pollute the land around landfills[1]. Plastics will stay there, be washed away into streams/rivers, or be unburied in the future, practically in the same condition they were originally - even hundreds or thousands of years in the future. > Products that are not biodegradable or are slow to decompose, like plastic, can remain in landfill sites for centuries, often emitting gases that could be harmful to the environment.[2] > Landfills and dumps buried over often become suburban home sites in later years, unbeknownst to people who may live on them. Landfills have a distinctive effect on air pollution, nature, land and humans. Soil in the area may be saturated with chemicals or hazardous substances[3] [1] https://environmentvictoria.org.au/resource/problem-landfill/ https://environmentvictoria.org.au/resource/problem-landfill... [2] https://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/How_Does_Recycling_Affect_the_Environment https://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/How_Does_Recycling_Affect... [3] https://sciencing.com/effects-landfills-environment-8662463.html https://sciencing.com/effects-landfills-environment-8662463....
        njarboe 8y ago
        I guess I should have said, "Putting things into a recently (last 30is years) constructed landfill with methane capture is not a problem for the environment. The point is putting things into landfills is a great alternative to just releasing them into the environment. The major problem with stuff, from an environmental view, is not its disposal in well designed landfills, but surface dumping and the problems with how its made and transported.
        dragonwriter 8y ago
        > I guess I should have said, "Putting things into a recently (last 30is years) constructed landfill with methane capture is not a problem for the environment. Well, other than the problem that landfills will need to continue increase in size and consume the entire environment, and the environmental impact of converting land into landfills in the first place, that might be approximately correct. > The point is putting things into landfills is a great alternative to just releasing them into the environment. In the sense that being kicked in the genitals is a great alternative to having cigarettes put out on them, sure, but neither is good from an environmental point of view.
- keeganjw 8y ago
  "Under proper conditions" being the key words here.

Alupis 8y ago

> The problem with Biodegradable plastic is that it still requires a special process to break it down That's not true, actually. From the article: > A peer-reviewed report of the work shows 91% biodegradation in a soil environment within 24 months, when tested in accordance with ISO 17556 > Under proper conditions, some biodegradable plastics can degrade to the point where microorganisms can completely metabolise them to carbon dioxide (and water). For example, starch-based bioplastics produced from sustainable farming methods could be almost carbon neutral.

dragonwriter 8y ago
The ocean is not a soil environment; so it degrading well in soil doesn't necessarily help if it is a waste stream that ends up in the ocean.
- Alupis 8y ago
  The article references starch-based bioplastics - and the ocean is quite an environment, filled with micro-organisms and minerals which readily decompose other organic materials. I don't see a reason we cannot create something that works in that environment too - however, the overwhelming majority of our plastic waste isn't going into the ocean; rather, it's going into landfills where it will sit for thousands of years.
  - njarboe 8y ago
    Things sitting in landfills are not a problem for the environment. It is producing them in the first place that causes environmental damage. Imagine everything going into a landfill as a resource our ancestors can mine in the future.
    - Alupis 8y ago
      > Things sitting in landfills are not a problem for the environment That's not true either. Toxins, leachate, and greanhouse gases are given off from landfills and leach into ground water, or pollute the land around landfills[1]. Plastics will stay there, be washed away into streams/rivers, or be unburied in the future, practically in the same condition they were originally - even hundreds or thousands of years in the future. > Products that are not biodegradable or are slow to decompose, like plastic, can remain in landfill sites for centuries, often emitting gases that could be harmful to the environment.[2] > Landfills and dumps buried over often become suburban home sites in later years, unbeknownst to people who may live on them. Landfills have a distinctive effect on air pollution, nature, land and humans. Soil in the area may be saturated with chemicals or hazardous substances[3] [1] https://environmentvictoria.org.au/resource/problem-landfill/ https://environmentvictoria.org.au/resource/problem-landfill... [2] https://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/How_Does_Recycling_Affect_the_Environment https://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/How_Does_Recycling_Affect... [3] https://sciencing.com/effects-landfills-environment-8662463.html https://sciencing.com/effects-landfills-environment-8662463....
      - njarboe 8y ago
        I guess I should have said, "Putting things into a recently (last 30is years) constructed landfill with methane capture is not a problem for the environment. The point is putting things into landfills is a great alternative to just releasing them into the environment. The major problem with stuff, from an environmental view, is not its disposal in well designed landfills, but surface dumping and the problems with how its made and transported.
        dragonwriter 8y ago
        > I guess I should have said, "Putting things into a recently (last 30is years) constructed landfill with methane capture is not a problem for the environment. Well, other than the problem that landfills will need to continue increase in size and consume the entire environment, and the environmental impact of converting land into landfills in the first place, that might be approximately correct. > The point is putting things into landfills is a great alternative to just releasing them into the environment. In the sense that being kicked in the genitals is a great alternative to having cigarettes put out on them, sure, but neither is good from an environmental point of view.
keeganjw 8y ago
"Under proper conditions" being the key words here.