6 ms·
It seems like the only sane way to make use of refuse mixed plastic is to incinerate it for energy. Perhaps as peaker plants that can be brought online when th
by howlin 4y ago
It seems like the only sane way to make use of refuse mixed plastic is to incinerate it for energy. Perhaps as peaker plants that can be brought online when there isn't sufficient renewable energy to meet demand.
Burning plastic is clearly dirty, but with sufficient heat and airborne pollutant scrubbers I doubt it's any worse than coal.
- userbinator 4y agoBurning plastic is clearly dirty, but with sufficient heat and airborne pollutant scrubbers I doubt it's any worse than coal. It depends on which plastic exactly (which is one of the reasons the whole "plastic=bad" mentality irritates me in the same way as stereotyping), but a regular plastic bag is going to be almost pure polyethylene --- essentially a very long-chain wax --- and combustion of that will definitely be cleaner than coal. At the other end are the halogenated polymers like PVC and PTFE whose combustion products are definitely much worse than coal.
- ars 4y agoPVC and PTFE are rarely found in trash, certainly not in the volumes of the rest of the types. With a properly made incinerator (which isn't hard to do) burning plastic is cleaner than burning oil or coal. A bit of filtration will catch the halogens in case they slip in.
- exmadscientist 4y agoPTFE, no, not common at all. Its relatives are rather common in food packaging (liners and seals), though. PVC... man, PVC is in a lot of things. Surprisingly many things. The monomer/polymer itself isn't that awful, but some of the plasticizers truly scare me. And I'm often favorably inclined towards the chemical industry!
- ars 4y agoPVC is in a lot of toys, pipes, things like that. But it's not common in single use, or low use plastics.
- ge96 4y agounrelated about chemical I keep wondering if there is a way to make a "stomach" that can dissolve plastic/make energy with it, whether directly or as an electrolyte base (add zinc/copper) I am aware of the bacteria that can eat plastic but too slow
- bombcar 4y agoWeird. This comment says 15 minutes ago in the main view, but 20 hours ago when I go to reply to it. I guess the whole post got "pushed to the front" again.
- Teever 4y agoHas that been happening a lot lately? I've been noticing threads that I swear I read days ago on the front page and their dates are from today. It's really confusing.
- bombcar 4y agoI believe there’s a second chance algorithm that runs or is manually triggered by dang. https://news.ycombinator.com/pool https://news.ycombinator.com/pool May be involved.
- throwaway67743 4y agoYou don't burn those though, they stay in the walls of homes/mains/whatever for a long time, by the time they need replacing I'm hoping we'll have a solution (easily 50 years in some cases) Also actually that covers a huge portion of plastics considered "strong enough" ironically perhaps, this may turn out to be a huge nightmare but we won't be here to see it, so
- rcMgD2BwE72F 4y agoAre we really trying to substitute plastics with less polluting/toxic materials? Isn't plastic's source the byproduct of fossil fuel generation, and therefore there are still economic incentive to use it somehow, as long as we keep extracting oil?
- jimmygrapes 4y agoThe secret they don't want you to know is that fossil fuels are actually renewable
- ZeroGravitas 4y agoYeah, I dont mind plastic as a material, it has lots of interesting uses. Anything that funds fossil fuel extraction though is best avoided whenever there's an alternative. They're going to use those profits to try to continue to destroy human society.
- tintedfireglass 4y agoA million years ago the bark of a tree was impossible to degrade in nature, but now you can't prevent a log from decomposing. Similarly, nature will find a way-it always finds a way.
- hypertele-Xii 4y agoThough, it potentially takes billions of years to do so. Not that great for human planning.
- tintedfireglass 4y agoYes, but that's a different issue