SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Using a special technical approach, the team is working on plastic films derived from konjac flour and starch, cellulose or proteins that are fully edible and harmless if accidentally eaten by people or animals—unlike health issues associated with microplastics and other plastic waste that make their way into the food chain.
The researchers have found that plant carbohydrate and protein macromolecules bond together into a special network structure during the film-forming process. The network structure provides the film with a required mechanical strength and transparent appearance for the film to be used as packaging materials.
The idea is to reduce incidence of plastic in the environment.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Green and Edible Cling Film and Food Packaging Made from Plants
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 32 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The Official Colorado State Vegetable is now the "state legislator".
(Score: 5, Informative) by requerdanos on Tuesday November 27 2018, @07:39PM (9 children)
Before plastic became common, with the consequence of megaplastic, macroplastic, and microplastic pollution and associated ills, what packaging did humankind use, and what were the consequences?
The following packaging materials are considered on their own merits. Consider that they can be produced with or without adding solvents, coatings, and/or preservatives that are themselves envrio-evil:
Wood: Is recyclable, reusable, and a naturally biodegradable fertilizer. Toxic or poisonous: No
Glass: Is a recyclable, reusable natural mineral, another form of sand. Toxic or poisonous: No (inert) (unless it's still sharp)
Rock, Stone, Etc.: Recyclable, reusable natural minerals. Toxic or poisonous: No (inert)
Paper ranging from tissue to paper with or without wax to cardboard to corrugated fiberboard: Is recyclable and is a naturally biodegradable fertilizer. Toxic or poisonous: No
Metal containers made from metals such as aluminum or tin: Are metals from the earth, easily recyclable and returned to the earth if discarded. Toxic or poisonous: No
Metal foils such as aluminum or tin: Are metals from the earth, easily recyclable and returned to the earth if discarded. Toxic or poisonous: No
Cellophane: So named because it's made of cellulose, a natural fiber from things like wood. Is recyclable and is a naturally biodegradable fertilizer. Toxic or poisonous: No (Note: The team is working on a film derived from cellulose? There is material here that could be studied towards that end.)
Now, before plastics became widespread, perhaps 50 - 60 years ago, these were leading packing and packaging materials for somewhere between 10,000 and 10,000,000 years of human packing and packaging history.
Sure plastics have advantages, but the fact that plastic is simultaneously also so disadvantageous that people are cooking up konjac flour cling film is a sign that perhaps we as a packing and packaging society might need to rethink our default go-to packing materials.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Tuesday November 27 2018, @07:51PM (1 child)
Ceramic
Leather/skin (accidental source of humanity's first cheese/yogurts?)
People are buying glass mason jars and pyrex like hotcakes these days.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday November 27 2018, @08:12PM
We threw out all our plastics to use glass storage containers. It works pretty well.
Kids' snacks are a little harder, because glass is heavy and breakable and they'll never bring it back. Wax paper works well for sandwiches, but less well for chips.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 27 2018, @08:07PM (1 child)
(Score: 3, Informative) by DannyB on Tuesday November 27 2018, @09:39PM
Aluminum is even more energy consuming to produce than it is to recycle. To recycle it all you have to do is melt it. It takes even more energy to produce than to melt. Hence it is profitable to recycle aluminum. Enough so that you can get paid by the pound for aluminum.
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @08:09PM (4 children)
I modded you +1 Informative because your post is great, except that several of those packaging products are massively polluting when they are produced.
This of course is offset by the fact that many of them are reusable.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Tuesday November 27 2018, @09:03PM (2 children)
Which ones are polluting to produce?
I wish we could adopt German culture in regards to glass containers. I remember while visiting that you returned your empty bottles to the store, they were cleaned and refilled, and then put back out on the shelves.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @09:24PM
Paper factories can be massively polluting, although modern one don't tend to be so much.
Source: Worked in the printing industry for ~20 years.
Metals and glass production also pollute, although the potentially long life of the product might mitigate this somewhat.
I am not disagreeing with your basic point, just pointing out the possible effects.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Pslytely Psycho on Tuesday November 27 2018, @10:00PM
When I was a kid that was true here in the US as well. We used to round up bags of bottles to sell back to the stores at a nickle apiece. Lots of neighbors would give them to us just so they didn't have to haul them back themselves. Loved the old man on the corner, addicted to Coca Cola. He always had a bag or two every week for us.
So it's not a matter of adopting German culture, but reviving American culture.
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Tuesday November 27 2018, @11:10PM
That's kind of like the argument one hears sometimes of "Oh yeah? Well electric cars might be emissions-free but lots of the electricity comes from coal so the cars are very polluting to the atmosphere!" No, the cars aren't polluting the atmosphere--in fact those cars can be emissions-free and hydrocarbon-fuel vehicles can't, ever. You can combine emissions-free vehicles and charging them on green energy and get your emissions-free transportation; there's no law that says you have to add coal.
In the same way, these materials aren't polluting, massively or otherwise. In fact, these materials can be pollution-free, and plastic can't, ever. You can combine these materials and non-pollution-introducing manufacturing methods and get your non-polluting materials; there's no law that says you have to manufacture them in environmentally hazardous ways.
I point this out in the sentence before the list begins.
Sure, you can make rainbows and sunshine "evil pollutants" in this way by adding carcinogens and spent nuclear fuel--that doesn't make rainbows and sunshine bad things, it just makes you inept at environmental conservation. Blaming the rainbows and sunshine for "being massively polluting" when what they actually are is "massively polluted" kind of misses the point of this exercise.