Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

impact-solutions.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 97 posts

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#21

Post by flumpmaster »

maxerickson wrote: post #7
progbits wrote: post #5

The explanation is quite disappointing: Using an alternative "might" be worse in few ways. OK, so where is the data, pros and cons comparison?

The likely reality is that shifting to a replacement will just result in the animal product being dumped. It's likely a byproduct of meat consumption that is inexpensive to use because there is lots of meat consumption. Another 'huh?' product that contains animal derived ingredients are various dryer sheets (they don't all, but many do).

An alternate (and growing) use of Tallow is as a feedstock for renewable diesel / sustainable aviation fuel production.

Tallow is a traded commodity. It is unlikely to get dumped.

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#22

Post by phphphphp »

ccooffee wrote: post #9

This submission claims that "traditional banknotes which are based on special and expensive paper suffer from poor tear properties and they have limited life", and touts tallow-dependent plastics as a solution. US currency is made of a cotton-linen blend, so (pedantically) it is not paper. Per US Currency Education Program [1], "it would take 4000 double folds, forwards and backwards, to tear a banknote". Is this ins…

They say “paper” but it was a cotton blend much like USD. They’re shit talking old notes because it’s good for business. I haven’t touched cash in a while but I don’t recall any meaningful difference in the durability of “paper” GBP and USD.

Edit: the additional context for this article is at the time the notes were released, there was a lot of anger when people discovered the notes contained animal products.

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#23

Post by meindnoch »

andylynch wrote: post #2

This piece avoids mentioning why it was written- around this time, it came to light that new UK bank notes contain beef tallow so are problematic for Hindu and vegan people who rightly have problems with these replacing old paper notes.

>rightly have problems with these replacing old paper notes.

Rightly?

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#24

Post by londons_explore »

ccooffee wrote: post #9

This submission claims that "traditional banknotes which are based on special and expensive paper suffer from poor tear properties and they have limited life", and touts tallow-dependent plastics as a solution. US currency is made of a cotton-linen blend, so (pedantically) it is not paper. Per US Currency Education Program [1], "it would take 4000 double folds, forwards and backwards, to tear a banknote". Is this ins…

Old UK banknotes, made of 'paper', had no real durability issue.

I think the key benefit of polymer notes is the opportunity for far more security features. Holograms, Prismatic effects, braille printing, variable transparency, etc.

Also, they're probably cheaper, considering most of Europe uses polymer notes too.

The UK had issues with banknote forgery, so a change over to a new base material makes a good clean cutoff to say "no paper notes are valid anymore", which cuts off forgers too.

The US also has major note forgery issues, but to my knowledge they have never taken serious action against fake notes. If they did, they would probably switch to polymer too.

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#25

Post by samwillis »

Another interesting additive in many plastics is glass fibres or beads, they are often used to strengthen the plastic and give it slightly different mechanical properties. The downside of the glass fillers is that they erode the tools much more quickly (glass is very abrasive), kind of the opposite of Tallow which helps to keep the plastic flowing over the surfaces better.

On glass filled parts you will often see a small ring around the "gate" (gates are where the plastic is injected). The gate is under enormous pressure and has a very high flow rate through it, so it tends to erode significantly more quickly. To counter that the gate is often an inserted part that can be changed out easily when servicing the tool, or made from a higher toughened grade of steel. Hence a small ring, a witness mark of where the join is.

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#26

Post by rsynnott »

ccooffee wrote: post #9

This submission claims that "traditional banknotes which are based on special and expensive paper suffer from poor tear properties and they have limited life", and touts tallow-dependent plastics as a solution. US currency is made of a cotton-linen blend, so (pedantically) it is not paper. Per US Currency Education Program [1], "it would take 4000 double folds, forwards and backwards, to tear a banknote". Is this ins…

Even more pedantically, paper made from cotton and linen is paper by most definitions.

Wood pulp paper is by far the most common these days, but that's surprisingly recent (mid-19th century). Before that it was mostly cotton, linen and hemp.

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#28

Post by tbalsam »

The phrase "There are alternative options such as non-animal fats and hydrocarbon waxes, but these might increase the cost of production, reduce efficiency, affect recyclability and finally negatively affect the environment."....

....is such a semi-randomly grab-bagged set of statements similar to a set of nigh-unverifiable closing statements made as a desperate last-ditch attempt at proving a point in a debate that I feel it significantly weakens the article's stance, not strengthens it.

For example, with people with religious and moral objections to using animal products along governmentally-supervised transactional lines, whataboutism involving other parts of the supply chain/where animal products are used don't really serve to prove the point -- again. In turn, if we were to use this bit of what I'd consider to be somewhat faulty logic, the bank notes could be used as leverage in the future as the example in a list of products that uses animal products, just as other items in that list are being used as leverage today.

As for my position -- sometimes I eat meat, sometimes I don't, but I'd like to please avoid flesh in my money, however miniscule.

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#29

Post by flandish »

tbalsam wrote: post #28

The phrase "There are alternative options such as non-animal fats and hydrocarbon waxes, but these might increase the cost of production, reduce efficiency, affect recyclability and finally negatively affect the environment.".... ....is such a semi-randomly grab-bagged set of statements similar to a set of nigh-unverifiable closing statements made as a desperate last-ditch attempt at proving a point in a debate that…

Anything from a corporation saying “fearful” (for your wallet) things like “may cost more to produce(costing you more)” or reduce efficiency (costing you more) etc…

Is just reworded excuses as to the corporation’s choosing profit. For they will never say “profit us less.”

Re: Tallow in plastics – why? (2016)

#30

Post by eckesicle »

phphphphp wrote: post #22
ccooffee wrote: post #9

This submission claims that "traditional banknotes which are based on special and expensive paper suffer from poor tear properties and they have limited life", and touts tallow-dependent plastics as a solution. US currency is made of a cotton-linen blend, so (pedantically) it is not paper. Per US Currency Education Program [1], "it would take 4000 double folds, forwards and backwards, to tear a banknote". Is this ins…

They say “paper” but it was a cotton blend much like USD. They’re shit talking old notes because it’s good for business. I haven’t touched cash in a while but I don’t recall any meaningful difference in the durability of “paper” GBP and USD. Edit: the additional context for this article is at the time the notes were released, there was a lot of anger when people discovered the notes contained animal products.

There's £2Bn worth of fivers in circulation. A note weighs 0.7grams and contains less than 0.05% tallow. That means that between one and three cows supplied the tallow necessary to produce the entire monetary supply of the country.

This anger seems somewhat misguided considering the number of animals that are butchered for food in the UK every day.

Post reply on HN