Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday May 08 2017, @11:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the try-recycling dept.

To estimate the risk presented by plastics when they accumulate in the environment instead of in the garbage bin, the team of chemists led by Frederik Wurm are working on the PlastX project with social scientists from Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt and the Institute for Social-Ecological Research. The researchers are seeking to present potential alternatives to the customary polymer materials and to put forward proposals on how environmental pollution by plastics can be reduced, not just in Germany but primarily in developing and emerging countries. The North-Rhine Westphalia consumer advice centre, the "Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit" and various companies – such as the supermarket chain Tegut – are also taking part in the project being funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

The researchers working on the PlastX project soon realized that there were no straightforward solutions to the issues they were seeking to resolve. First of all, there is the danger that plastics in the environment pose to animals and humans. The materials are today perceived as a threat for this reason alone because they are so durable and accumulate on a large scale in the environment unless they are properly disposed of. The figures in themselves are alarming: A US study conducted by, among others, researchers from the University of Georgia revealed that the volume of plastic waste is increasing by 4.8 to 12.7 million tons a year – mainly because packaging and unwanted devices are carelessly thrown away. According to a study by IUCN, an international nature conservation organization, between 0.8 and 2.5 million tons of plastic micro-particles are pumped into the oceans each year.

"It is not yet clear to what extent plastics – particularly in the form of micro-particles – are hazardous to animals and humans," says Frederik Wurm. "For example, we do not yet know whether they produce nanoparticles that are much more easily absorbed by the body than micro-particles." There is also uncertainty over whether harmful substances find their way into animal or human organisms through the plastic particles or whether they are then detached from the plastic particles there.

Not enough ozone, too much carbon dioxide, and seas of plastic. What is to be done?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by gringer on Tuesday May 09 2017, @04:56AM (1 child)

    by gringer (962) on Tuesday May 09 2017, @04:56AM (#506753)

    It would be a good idea to first evaluate the harm with respect to current alternatives:

    1. Make sure that there is actually a problem with at least the most commonly-used plastics
    2. Make sure that the harm caused by alternatives is no worse than the harm caused by plastics

    Both these points are touched on in the article:

    "It is not yet clear to what extent plastics – particularly in the form of micro-particles – are hazardous to animals and humans," says Frederik Wurm. "For example, we do not yet know whether they produce nanoparticles that are much more easily absorbed by the body than micro-particles."

    With regard to plastic bags, for example, paper ones do not provide an eco-friendly alternative either, according to the "Deutsche Umwelthilfe" environmental organization. Producing them requires much more energy, and water and chemicals are used that are harmful to the environment. The environmental footprint of a paper bag is thus worse than that of a plastic one disposed of properly.

    --
    Ask me about Sequencing DNA in front of Linus Torvalds [youtube.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @12:51PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @12:51PM (#506864)

    The environmental footprint of a paper bag is thus worse than that of a plastic one disposed of properly.

    In this comparison, was a paper bag also disposed of properly?
    Or, more to the point, was a paper bag produced properly because clearly that is a comparison between apples and oranges - we are comparing pollution at production time vs. pollution after useful life of a product has ended.
    For me it is clear that paper bag is better then plastic bag if it is going to end up in environment, but something obviously needs to be done with production process of paper - it is probably too cheap now that it can afford to be wasteful. It has to be revised and optimized for minimal pollution, instead of for minimal cost, as first priority