4 ms·

So dumping all our plastic in the sea will work out! /s It seems like these discoveries are coming quickly and in higher numbers. Maybe there's hope in recycli

So dumping all our plastic in the sea will work out! /s It seems like these discoveries are coming quickly and in higher numbers. Maybe there's hope in recycling/processing plastics down simpler molecules after all. Currently, recycling plastic is a bit of a lie -- very little of it is actually recycled.

kzrdude 3y ago
I'm fearing that degradable plastics is also a lie.. is it just turning it into microplastics small enough that the problem visually disappears?
- Kerb_ 3y ago
  It breaks them down into their atomic components and enables bacteria that can straight up digest plastic. The issue from this is that we rely on plastics not being degradable for a lot of the properties we use it for. Imagine if bugs got this enzyme in their gut bacteria, and started eating the food wrappers instead of just nibbling through them. Plastic used to seal sterile equipment in medical settings or for implants? Useless. The plastic waste would only last a few years relative to the decades+ now, but it would also ruin plastic's ability to seal stuff, which is why we use it. Overall, probably a good thing to reduce our reliance on plastic, but it will come at a cost, it's not just "we can dump plastic in the ocean now"
  - coffeebeqn 3y ago
    It would still be difficult for bugs to gnaw on solid plastic
    - Kerb_ 3y ago
      It's difficult for bugs to gnaw on solid wood, too. Termites still cause billions in damages a year.
      - Tagbert 3y ago
        And they took millions of years to evolve and depend on microbes living in their gut to digest the wood. They have to keep those microbes in a protected environment to allow them do do the digestion. They aren’t just digesting wood out in the open.
        Kerb_ 3y ago
        I can follow these goalposts. They're already in gut microbiomes. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29763555/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29763555/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32374590/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32374590/
titzer 3y ago
I recognize the sarcasm in your first sentence, but I am not super hopeful. The question is always, "so now it breaks down...into what? And what happens to that?". If that gives rise to the equivalent of some kind of algal bloom that then kills off other life, it might actually be worse than the microplastics themselves. I for one do not hold out hope for recycling plastics. We had more sustainable materials in the past, and in places we still do that. For example, reusing beer bottles with the Pfand system in Germany, or milk bottles, crates, durable packaging. We're still going backwards with this consumerist throwaway culture.
- EGreg 3y ago
  Here here. Unfortunately the government has teamed up with the corporations to continue to push it for decades: https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362 https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362 The recycling was a scam to keep the public distracted so their impulse to “do something” would lead to individuan action rather than lead to organizing to demand reforms!
hutzlibu 3y ago
"Currently, recycling plastic is a bit of a lie -- very little of it is actually recycled." Depends where you live and what you consider recycling. If you mean, making new plastics out of the old, than the challenge is, that there are many, many different plastics you cannot just melt in and reuse if mixed together. A annoying, but working solution here in germany is a mandated bottle bill. Meaning you pay 25 cent extra per bottle, and get it back, if you return that bottle into a machine: but this results in actual reusable plastics as they are all of the same kind. And for the rest, the most pragmatic solution is burning it for energy. If you use filters, it is not so bad and it is recycling, but it is the same as burning fossil fuels, so not a good long term solution.
- digging 3y ago
  > And for the rest, the most pragmatic solution is burning it for energy. I really wish we'd do more of this. I know it's not ideal, but we in the US need to treat plastic like the trash that it (mostly) is. And trash is just fuel. Instead we have convenient single-stream recycling which means all our actual recyclables also end up in the trash and/or oceans.
  - ZeWaka 3y ago
    We actually do a fair amount of this in the US. Marion County in Oregon burns 90% of their trash. It's much better than landfills, anyways.
    - gruez 3y ago
      How is burning better than landfilling it? If the landfill is lined the garbage isn't going anywhere, and leaving the plastic in the ground is much better than releasing its co2 into the atmosphere. Land use might be an issue in some places, but I doubt that's the case in Oregon.
      - parineum 3y ago
        > Land use might be an issue in some places It really isn't the land that's the problem, there is absolutely plenty of land to support the entire earth's population of trash in landfills. Just like with food, the problem is moving it to the places you want it to be.

kzrdude 3y ago

I'm fearing that degradable plastics is also a lie.. is it just turning it into microplastics small enough that the problem visually disappears?

Kerb_ 3y ago
It breaks them down into their atomic components and enables bacteria that can straight up digest plastic. The issue from this is that we rely on plastics not being degradable for a lot of the properties we use it for. Imagine if bugs got this enzyme in their gut bacteria, and started eating the food wrappers instead of just nibbling through them. Plastic used to seal sterile equipment in medical settings or for implants? Useless. The plastic waste would only last a few years relative to the decades+ now, but it would also ruin plastic's ability to seal stuff, which is why we use it. Overall, probably a good thing to reduce our reliance on plastic, but it will come at a cost, it's not just "we can dump plastic in the ocean now"
- coffeebeqn 3y ago
  It would still be difficult for bugs to gnaw on solid plastic
  - Kerb_ 3y ago
    It's difficult for bugs to gnaw on solid wood, too. Termites still cause billions in damages a year.
    - Tagbert 3y ago
      And they took millions of years to evolve and depend on microbes living in their gut to digest the wood. They have to keep those microbes in a protected environment to allow them do do the digestion. They aren’t just digesting wood out in the open.
      - Kerb_ 3y ago
        I can follow these goalposts. They're already in gut microbiomes. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29763555/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29763555/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32374590/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32374590/

titzer 3y ago

I recognize the sarcasm in your first sentence, but I am not super hopeful. The question is always, "so now it breaks down...into what? And what happens to that?". If that gives rise to the equivalent of some kind of algal bloom that then kills off other life, it might actually be worse than the microplastics themselves. I for one do not hold out hope for recycling plastics. We had more sustainable materials in the past, and in places we still do that. For example, reusing beer bottles with the Pfand system in Germany, or milk bottles, crates, durable packaging. We're still going backwards with this consumerist throwaway culture.

EGreg 3y ago
Here here. Unfortunately the government has teamed up with the corporations to continue to push it for decades: https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362 https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362 The recycling was a scam to keep the public distracted so their impulse to “do something” would lead to individuan action rather than lead to organizing to demand reforms!

hutzlibu 3y ago

"Currently, recycling plastic is a bit of a lie -- very little of it is actually recycled." Depends where you live and what you consider recycling. If you mean, making new plastics out of the old, than the challenge is, that there are many, many different plastics you cannot just melt in and reuse if mixed together. A annoying, but working solution here in germany is a mandated bottle bill. Meaning you pay 25 cent extra per bottle, and get it back, if you return that bottle into a machine: but this results in actual reusable plastics as they are all of the same kind. And for the rest, the most pragmatic solution is burning it for energy. If you use filters, it is not so bad and it is recycling, but it is the same as burning fossil fuels, so not a good long term solution.

digging 3y ago
> And for the rest, the most pragmatic solution is burning it for energy. I really wish we'd do more of this. I know it's not ideal, but we in the US need to treat plastic like the trash that it (mostly) is. And trash is just fuel. Instead we have convenient single-stream recycling which means all our actual recyclables also end up in the trash and/or oceans.
- ZeWaka 3y ago
  We actually do a fair amount of this in the US. Marion County in Oregon burns 90% of their trash. It's much better than landfills, anyways.
  - gruez 3y ago
    How is burning better than landfilling it? If the landfill is lined the garbage isn't going anywhere, and leaving the plastic in the ground is much better than releasing its co2 into the atmosphere. Land use might be an issue in some places, but I doubt that's the case in Oregon.
    - parineum 3y ago
      > Land use might be an issue in some places It really isn't the land that's the problem, there is absolutely plenty of land to support the entire earth's population of trash in landfills. Just like with food, the problem is moving it to the places you want it to be.