4 ms·

Surely the label "forever chemicals" was a bit alarmist if household cleaning goods could break them down...

by rob_c 4y ago

ceejayoz 4y ago
They're "forever" because they persist in the environment. You're not likely to find this specific combination of temperature and solvents in the wild. It's something you might be able to use in water treatment plants in areas where the supply has been contaminated. As the article notes, we already had ways of breaking them down, just with difficultly: "current PFAS-destruction techniques, such as incineration, can require vast amounts of energy, superhigh temperatures, and millions of dollars".
- rob_c 4y ago
  So cleaning up after ourselves as a species requires effort... Again, this... Frankly doesn't surprise me, and I'm not blaming you for posting it but it just makes me want to crawl back into a cave and watch it all burn...
freemint 4y ago
The same household chemicals (especially at 120 degrees C) would kill all life. They are effectively forever in the environment.
- cityofdelusion 4y ago
  Well, on human timescales, yes. They will eventually subduct into the mantle and be vaporized.
- rob_c 4y ago
  Yes, extracting contaminated materials from an environment and decontaminating them would removing life because it's destructive. That's what cleaning this stuff up involves. I'm all for "environmentally damaging" or someother name but "forever chemicals" is just a bad name for this that is going to get picked up on by people. I'm not suggesting burn so much co2 that the planet gets to 120C, although it'd have less human problems at that point.
  - paulmd 4y ago
    Pumping high-strength lye heated to 40-120C into the environment (soil and water supply) in large enough quantities to neutralize PFOA over large areas is right up there with alt.pave.the.earth in terms of practicality and environmentalism. some serious HackerNews brain right there, just needs an app and I can get my bingo. There aren't many chemicals that won't be destroyed in those conditions, the lye will just rip hydrogen off most molecules, but, it'll also do it to, you know, pretty much everything else too. You ever see a chemical burn before? Literally this, but imagine a solution of the lye that's hot to make it even more reactive... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvtUrjfnSnA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvtUrjfnSnA
    - rob_c2 4y ago
      Why are you assuming I'm promoting insanity? Remove the contaminated material from nature first then return it. Cleaned. I'm not saying we should dump more chemicals because of chemicals. This is a depressingly stupid conversation.

Surely the label "forever chemicals" was a bit alarmist if household cleaning goods could break them down...

by rob_c 4y ago

Surely the label "forever chemicals" was a bit alarmist if household cleaning goods could break them down...

They're "forever" because they persist in the environment. You're not likely to find this specific combination of temperature and solvents in the wild. It's something you might be able to use in water treatment plants in areas where the supply has been contaminated. As the article notes, we already had ways of breaking them down, just with difficultly: "current PFAS-destruction techniques, such as incineration, can require vast amounts of energy, superhigh temperatures, and millions of dollars".

rob_c 4y ago
So cleaning up after ourselves as a species requires effort... Again, this... Frankly doesn't surprise me, and I'm not blaming you for posting it but it just makes me want to crawl back into a cave and watch it all burn...

freemint 4y ago

The same household chemicals (especially at 120 degrees C) would kill all life. They are effectively forever in the environment.

cityofdelusion 4y ago
Well, on human timescales, yes. They will eventually subduct into the mantle and be vaporized.
rob_c 4y ago
Yes, extracting contaminated materials from an environment and decontaminating them would removing life because it's destructive. That's what cleaning this stuff up involves. I'm all for "environmentally damaging" or someother name but "forever chemicals" is just a bad name for this that is going to get picked up on by people. I'm not suggesting burn so much co2 that the planet gets to 120C, although it'd have less human problems at that point.
- paulmd 4y ago
  Pumping high-strength lye heated to 40-120C into the environment (soil and water supply) in large enough quantities to neutralize PFOA over large areas is right up there with alt.pave.the.earth in terms of practicality and environmentalism. some serious HackerNews brain right there, just needs an app and I can get my bingo. There aren't many chemicals that won't be destroyed in those conditions, the lye will just rip hydrogen off most molecules, but, it'll also do it to, you know, pretty much everything else too. You ever see a chemical burn before? Literally this, but imagine a solution of the lye that's hot to make it even more reactive... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvtUrjfnSnA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvtUrjfnSnA
  - rob_c2 4y ago
    Why are you assuming I'm promoting insanity? Remove the contaminated material from nature first then return it. Cleaned. I'm not saying we should dump more chemicals because of chemicals. This is a depressingly stupid conversation.