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

Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 132 posts

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#81

Post by cma »

hammock wrote: post #23
myshpa wrote: post #21

Change my mind: 90%+ of plastic is not necessary. Not necessary: - plastic bottles (good only for coca-cola's profits etc., 90% of bottled drinks contain microplastics, use glass) - food wrappers (use paper & natural wax, not pfoas) - plastic shopping bags (use textile bags like our grandma's did) - eshop packages (ever received goods in plastic bags wrapped in insane amounts of additional plastic?) - tea bags made w…

>natural wax The only commercially viable wax is paraffin, which is petroleum derived >bamboo All of the bamboo products for sale are glued together with petroleum derived adhesives and often finished with petroleum based products like mineral oil

Some use fish glue (though still using petroleum and causing a majority of microplastic ocean pollution via the nets).

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#82

Post by marginalia_nu »

njarboe wrote: post #73
marginalia_nu wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah in a lot of ways the things that make plastics bad for the environment makes them good for electrical insulation. Primarily how they don't break down very easily, aren't particularly chemically reactive, don't rot, etc.

The knob and tube wiring in my 1930's house was still working fine. That tech would need to be updated for modern safety requirements (ground wire, etc) but worked without plastics for about 50 years. Much high cost though, I would guess.

Old wire is usually fine if it just sits there, but it may no longer be water proof or turn hard and brittle. That's why the failure mode is so unfortunate, it loses the properties you'd want in an insulator while still appearing safe.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#83

Post by shiftpgdn »

mrtranscendence wrote: post #61
shiftpgdn wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proof bread with a cloth. Glass containers for food are very durable, I've yet to break one.

How long have you been cooking? I've broken pie dishes, 9x13 baking dishes, measuring cups ... probably other things. Maybe I'm a butterfingers but that doesn't change matters.

30ish years.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#84

Post by lumb63 »

myshpa wrote: post #21

Change my mind: 90%+ of plastic is not necessary. Not necessary: - plastic bottles (good only for coca-cola's profits etc., 90% of bottled drinks contain microplastics, use glass) - food wrappers (use paper & natural wax, not pfoas) - plastic shopping bags (use textile bags like our grandma's did) - eshop packages (ever received goods in plastic bags wrapped in insane amounts of additional plastic?) - tea bags made w…

A huge barrier to eliminating plastic use is making people aware of their plastic use. Prior to thinking about it and investigating, I was unaware of how many plastics I was using.

How many people think their clothing is plastic? They probably think it’s “some textile” and that’s all the thought they ever give it. How many people consider the plastic in their dishwasher or laundry pods, or in packaging? They’re all unconscious decisions that people make because they are using what corporations give them.

Also, related, reusable stuff is great and disposable stuff sucks. I always joke about wondering what the sales pitch was for disposable razors: “have you ever wished you had to replace your entire razor every time the blade dulled?” Not only is it wasteful but it simply makes no sense in many cases.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#85

Post by myshpa »

coryrc wrote: post #72
myshpa wrote: post #21

Change my mind: 90%+ of plastic is not necessary. Not necessary: - plastic bottles (good only for coca-cola's profits etc., 90% of bottled drinks contain microplastics, use glass) - food wrappers (use paper & natural wax, not pfoas) - plastic shopping bags (use textile bags like our grandma's did) - eshop packages (ever received goods in plastic bags wrapped in insane amounts of additional plastic?) - tea bags made w…

> polystyrene for home insulation (why not support plant based alternatives, like hemp / hempcrete) Not a class-II vapor retarder. Can't build a comfortable and energy-efficient home without air barrier vapor retarders. (You can build an uncomfortable one, or one which uses far more energy). > tooth brushes (what's wrong with wood/bamboo ?) They all still use nylon brushes. > food wrappers You must be unfamiliar with…

> not a class-II vapor retarder

No time to elaborate, but from what I've read about it, hempcrete houses were built in different environments, even on seashores, as the hemp will petrify and turn the lime back into stone, but keeping the good properties. I've yet to hear about problems with water vapor or about one where it's uncomfortable to live in. Hempcrete has superb insulation properties, it may easily be the best material for home construction.

https://insidergrowth.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-he...

https://greathemp.net/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-hempcr...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/29/science/hemp-homes-cannab...

> they all still use nylon brushes

Or boar hair ... and that's obviously not good either. Don't know what the best material is. But with using just the nylon brushes, and replacing the rest with wood, we'd save apx. 98% of the material.

> You must be unfamiliar with warehouse conditions

I'm not. But if you eat plant based only, that's maybe less worry than if we were talking about meat/cheese, I assume.

There were no individually packed deli/cheese cuts when I was young. The shops instead had a counter with a shop person preparing orders, packing them into waxed paper. I've seen some counters recently, so it's still practiced somewhere. And people buy it and live, even without plastic.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#86

Post by klyrs »

mrtranscendence wrote: post #61
shiftpgdn wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proof bread with a cloth. Glass containers for food are very durable, I've yet to break one.

How long have you been cooking? I've broken pie dishes, 9x13 baking dishes, measuring cups ... probably other things. Maybe I'm a butterfingers but that doesn't change matters.

Question for both of you: what are your floors made of? Wood and linoleum often won't break dishes. Tile eats dishes like the cookie monster eats... ummm... carrots I guess.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#87

Post by myshpa »

FlyingAvatar wrote: post #77
myshpa wrote: post #21

Change my mind: 90%+ of plastic is not necessary. Not necessary: - plastic bottles (good only for coca-cola's profits etc., 90% of bottled drinks contain microplastics, use glass) - food wrappers (use paper & natural wax, not pfoas) - plastic shopping bags (use textile bags like our grandma's did) - eshop packages (ever received goods in plastic bags wrapped in insane amounts of additional plastic?) - tea bags made w…

In most cases, I would bet the CO2 impact of the alternatives you list is on the order of 2x - 10x. So long as plastics are not being burned, at least their carbon is not going into the atmosphere.

They touted the plastic as a way to protect the trees. It didn't stop the deforestation.

They told us they're inert. Then we've learned about bpa, pfas and microplastics.

They told us they're recyclable. Now we now that's not really the truth.

They tell us it's for saving CO2. Now we have the stuff in our seas, on beaches, microplastics in rain and wind, there is no place on earth free of it (not even the most remote areas).

The only reason why it's used is money ... to make & wrap stuff we don't need, and we (shall) pay for it with our health and poisoned environment.

Give me the glass, and reuse it and or recycle it. Energy is (soon will be) free.

> So long as plastics are not being burned, at least their carbon is not going into the atmosphere.

Keep it in the ground, then.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#88

Post by pixl97 »

jessekv wrote: post #66
rockostrich wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for the very kitchen focused comment but the kitchen is where I used the most plastic. Polycarbonate is a very useful plastic for food containers ("cambros") because it's lightweight, durable, and can be transparent. Sure, glass could work but it's a lot more fragile, especially if you were to try to constantly stack/unstack them in a commercial kitchen. To a lesser extent the same argument could be made for po…

In South East Asia, you can buy a lot of different prepared foods in banana, lotus, or bamboo leaf wrappings. Additionally, corn husks are used for wrapping tamales in Mexico. I wish I knew what the equivalent would have been in Europe. I would love to see traditional packaging getting popular in supermarkets around the world.

Risk adversity in the US will pretty much never allow this to happen. The moment one of those leaves has listeria or something like that on it, they'll be back in sterile plastic wrap.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#89

Post by pixl97 »

njarboe wrote: post #73
marginalia_nu wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah in a lot of ways the things that make plastics bad for the environment makes them good for electrical insulation. Primarily how they don't break down very easily, aren't particularly chemically reactive, don't rot, etc.

The knob and tube wiring in my 1930's house was still working fine. That tech would need to be updated for modern safety requirements (ground wire, etc) but worked without plastics for about 50 years. Much high cost though, I would guess.

Of course you're ignoring all the houses that burned to the ground because knob and tube sucks.

Re: Plastic-based fuels may present an “unreasonable risk” to human health

#90

Post by Retric »

jessekv wrote: post #66
rockostrich wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for the very kitchen focused comment but the kitchen is where I used the most plastic. Polycarbonate is a very useful plastic for food containers ("cambros") because it's lightweight, durable, and can be transparent. Sure, glass could work but it's a lot more fragile, especially if you were to try to constantly stack/unstack them in a commercial kitchen. To a lesser extent the same argument could be made for po…

In South East Asia, you can buy a lot of different prepared foods in banana, lotus, or bamboo leaf wrappings. Additionally, corn husks are used for wrapping tamales in Mexico. I wish I knew what the equivalent would have been in Europe. I would love to see traditional packaging getting popular in supermarkets around the world.

Lack of an air barrier is a huge limitation on shelf life. It’s not an issue for prepared foods you are about to eat but it is most things you’re buying at a grocery store.
Post reply on HN