Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#2Hey, at least we saved the planet.
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#3Well not sure I trust this website too much. Sure it tries for journalism "outside of the left/right echo chamber", but it's not too convincing looking at some of their headlines.
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#4There was a show here in Australia which looked at paper packaging of take out food having high amounts of PFAS. If paper is treated to not just disintegrate/get soaked immediately - its going to involve some nasty shit.
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#5Well not sure I trust this website too much. Sure it tries for journalism "outside of the left/right echo chamber", but it's not too convincing looking at some of their headlines.
The article has a link to the study here which should be quite trivial to reproduce by other researchers:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19440049.2023.2...
Just skip right to "Conclusion" for a TL;DR.
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#6There was a show here in Australia which looked at paper packaging of take out food having high amounts of PFAS. If paper is treated to not just disintegrate/get soaked immediately - its going to involve some nasty shit.
Wax is also used, wouldn't that be enough for most applications?
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#7There was a show here in Australia which looked at paper packaging of take out food having high amounts of PFAS. If paper is treated to not just disintegrate/get soaked immediately - its going to involve some nasty shit.
Yeah, the focus on straws is strange to me as that’s only a tiny part of the problem: every fast food wrapper, burger box, “disposable” soda or coffee cup has PFAS—maybe not the plastic lids, but those are clearly not things you want to dispose of either. The only exceptions are the old-school pizza boxes: that’s untreated cardboard, and they don’t handle the steam and grease for much longer than the delivery.
I was very confused when the law banned plastic straws, and they interviewed people on the street holding ten times more PFAS in their coffee cups, arguing they did their part…
The “solution” is non-disposable carriers. France is forcing McDonald’s and other fast food to change (but it’s mainly McD and small local actors there). I’m not sure why California and others haven’t pushed for those. There are solutions (disclaimer: I invested in a couple) using consignment, QR-code… It’s not super high-end tech, but it works. Start by mandating that coffee makers accept customers’ cups and the 20-penny discount that Starbucks does if you bring your own.
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#8There was a show here in Australia which looked at paper packaging of take out food having high amounts of PFAS. If paper is treated to not just disintegrate/get soaked immediately - its going to involve some nasty shit.
Wax is also used, wouldn't that be enough for most applications?
Wax is great, but it isn’t as likely to stick to smooth surfaces for long periods, or if things get hot or abrasive. It’s good on cloth, covering a dish you put in the fridge — but not sure how it would work with burger wrappers or cups of hot coffee, that are where most PFAS are used. I’d love to check if, in a straw, it would be perceptible. Metal straws remain the simplest solution.
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#9There was a show here in Australia which looked at paper packaging of take out food having high amounts of PFAS. If paper is treated to not just disintegrate/get soaked immediately - its going to involve some nasty shit.
Yeah, the focus on straws is strange to me as that’s only a tiny part of the problem: every fast food wrapper, burger box, “disposable” soda or coffee cup has PFAS—maybe not the plastic lids, but those are clearly not things you want to dispose of either. The only exceptions are the old-school pizza boxes: that’s untreated cardboard, and they don’t handle the steam and grease for much longer than the delivery. I was…
The focus on straws comes from two angles:
* the original environmental motivation was that they are strong, non-bio-degradable structures that pose threats to wildlife, similar to how the old 'can rings' got phased out.
* anything that involves government regulation, especially government regulation of stuff that involves the fossil petrochemical industry has an immensely well funded push back against it. It's a slippery slope, once you ban straws the next thing you know you might actually deal with the main cause of climate change and we wouldn't want that now would we.
> Their prohibition would, it was thought, reduce plastic waste getting into the environment. But to the degree that these bans led people to substitute paper for plastic, all they've done is swap out some minimal amount of plastic consumption for increased PFAS pollution.
Hmm "minimal amount of plastic consumption" vs "increased PFAS pollution"? Why is one pollution and one consumption? Why is one "a minimal amount" and the other an "increase"?
It's because this is effectively a PR outlet for fossil fuel corporations.
Re: Paper Straws Have Higher 'Forever Chemical' Concentration Than Plastic Straws
#10Well not sure I trust this website too much. Sure it tries for journalism "outside of the left/right echo chamber", but it's not too convincing looking at some of their headlines.
The article has a link to the study here which should be quite trivial to reproduce by other researchers: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19440049.2023.2... Just skip right to "Conclusion" for a TL;DR.
> Finally, three out of four plastic straw brands contained quantifiable PFAS concentrations.
Hmm, I wonder why this article didn't dwell on this finding?