4 ms·
Yeah that’s the problem. Plastic solves a logistics problem, not a structural problem. Are your Twinkies stuck in a hot truck in Texas for a week? No problem!
by exabrial 1y ago
Yeah that’s the problem. Plastic solves a logistics problem, not a structural problem.
Are your Twinkies stuck in a hot truck in Texas for a week? No problem!
- loktarogar 1y agoIt doesn't _only_ solve long-term logistical problems. Plastics are used for things like takeout containers, drink cups and straws, amongst others - things that are only needed for a short time.
- PunchyHamster 1y agoAll of those need to hold hot and wet things for long enough without contaminating them.
- loktarogar 1y agoAgree, but I don't see any mention of that in the article, so I don't have enough information to argue for that. I'm sure we can agree though that having 17-day decomposing plastics that don't contaminate with heat and water is a good thing, so I hope it is that.
- lazide 1y agoI’m pretty sure 17 days is far too short for most serious uses.
- kortilla 1y agoWho cares. If 50% of the usage is short term stuff like takeout, grocery bags, etc then this wipes out that waste.
- lazide 1y agoIf even 5% of the time it fails, no one will buy it for those purposes.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Jweb_Guru 1y agoI know that's not true because takeout containers certainly leak more than 5% of the time.
- reverius42 1y agoI would've said that about ChatGPT, but...
- account42 1y agoDecomposing isn't a binary process where you wait 17 days and then the plastic disappears. Something that decomposes in 17 days will have ~0.25% disintegrate every hour which means there is now contamination in your food. Personally I'd rather not wait for that contamination to be shown to cause health issues.
- yellowapple 1y agoWhat contaminants would result from cellulose-based plastics like in the article? I'd guess probably things that'd at worst make the hot and wet thing taste bad, no?
- exabrial 1y agoIs your shipment of drink containers stuck in a hot truck in Texas for a month? No problem! They’re plastic
- loktarogar 1y agoMy point is it doesn't have to be a complete solution to replacing plastic to be able to have some benefits to replacing some plastics. You can have local manufacturing processes so that it doesn't have to get stuck in a truck in Texas for a month. And there'll still be uses for the long lived plastics. You don't have to use one plastic for everything - like we don't today. Building a box that can last for centuries when you're only going to use it for 25 minutes and toss it is pretty wild if you think about it.
- exabrial 1y agoBro I’m not agreeing with it, single use plastics are ridiculous. The failure in replacements continues to be what problems they solve for the supply chain. Unless you want to eat at Applebees, a small, locally sourced, organic, etc restaurant owner can’t conjure up a supply of biodegradable containers. But your local joint can order 5000 of them and keep them in a back room in less than ideal conditions for a year at minimal costs. Not saying it’s right, just trying to draw attention to reality
- loktarogar 1y agoAgain, not all replacements need to replace 100% or even 10% of plastic use to be able to have an a positive impact. There's space for a short-life plastic just like there's (currently) reasons for long-life plastics
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- senthil_rajasek 1y agoI want my produce wrapped in this plastic not the forever plastic. Maybe the bio-degradable plastic has it's use cases for other special purpose packaging with a very short self life.
- red369 1y agoI don't know much about this area at all, but it seems like it would be neat to have a plastic that stood up well to heat and moisture, but you could leave it soaking in some petrol/diesel/oil liquid, and it would melt into that and leave you with something still useable. As I write this, it sounds like I'm just describing something like petrol in a solid form at room temperature. Perhaps there's something a little less far-fetched that people are working towards?
- lazide 1y agoPetrol is really quite harsh and includes cancerous chemicals like benzene in sizable quantities. It’s not something you can soak something in and then use to expose to food. Diesel and other oils tend to be (somewhat) less bad - but there are many oils in food which are nearly identical, and hence anything which breaks down in those situations is likely to breakdown while in food contact too.
- ars 1y ago> it sounds like I'm just describing something like petrol in a solid form at room temperature That's what plastic IS. That's why it sounds like it, because plastic is in fact solid hydrocarbon. So not only is it not farfetched, it exists today, which is also why incinerating plastic for energy is the best possible way to dispose it. You remove the plastic from the world, you reduce the amount of oil pumped for fuel, and you get to use the oil you do pump, twice! Once for plastic, and again for fuel. It's one of those environmental slam dunks with zero downsides. (Before you ask: Modern incinerators do not release any toxins from burning plastic, none.)
- par1970 1y agoSo do we already do this? And if not, why not?
- ars 1y agoWe sure do, Sweden imports trash (actual trash, not recycling) because it's a huge part of their energy source. A large amount of plastic recycling is burned, but always in secret, because when people find out they freak out, because they mistakenly think that making some new plastic out of it is somehow better.
- kevin_thibedeau 1y agoThey used to make it work with waxed paper. There's no reason why that can't be used for a large proportion of food packaging again.
- amanaplanacanal 1y agoI assume that anything sold today as waxed paper has plastic in on it, but I don't really know.
- nitwit005 1y agoThat's just a different non-biodegradable petroleum product: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax
- kevin_thibedeau 1y agoA lot of food grade wax is carnauba.