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

UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

news.ubc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#81

Post by hosh »

orangepurple wrote: post #69
hosh wrote: post #61

There is a researcher named John Todd whose work has been able to break down DDT in a matter of weeks. In this video, he gives a talk about some various projects. In the first one, he uses these methods to clean up a site contaminated with the top 15 pollutants (at least at the time). Heavy metal were sequestered by algea; 14 of the 15 toxins were below detectable levels, and the 15th was reduced by 99.999%; solids w…

That video changed my life

If you ever feel comfortable sharing that story, I’m interested in hearing it.

For me, I came across John Todd’s work from the podcast, Permaculture for the Future. It was part of a much larger toolkit and solutions we already have for healing our land and our home. Since deep diving into all of that, I don’t feel like I am drowning in what looks like the slow destruction of Earth, even as we are seeing more and more extreme weather events.

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#83

Post by im3w1l »

mrweiner wrote: post #2

Anybody want to drop in and burst my bubble? This sounds very promising!

Sure. This will be a possible add on to home water filtering solutions for paranoid stay at home moms but will not be used at a large scale. Lakes and seas will get filled with more and more microplastics which will enter the foodchain from there.

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#84

Post by ptx »

HyprMusic wrote: post #46
guyzero wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cheaper tea bags are made out of paper and they work just fine. Tetley, for instance.

Sadly they still contain plastic to seal them: "We’ve worked hard to ensure that our tea bags are 99% bio degradable. However, as a result of the manufacturing process, Tetley tea bags do contain a very small amount of plastic to ensure the bags remain closed for you to enjoy your cup of tea." https://www.tetley.co.uk/frequently-asked-questions

I just had a look at two of my non-Tetley teabags. They appear to be stitched closed with the end of the string. Why does it need plastic?

Edit: The quote from the FAQ mentions the bags being biodegradable, and this page [1] about their "new biodegradable bags" shows a photo of bags without strings. So maybe it's just these stringless (and presumably cheaper to manufacture?) bags that contain plastic?

The Twinings FAQ [2] doesn't mention plastic: "Our teabags are biodegradable, plant-based teabags and will break down within 6 months if placed into a local authority compost caddy, though it may not compost as quickly if left in garden compost (as typically these are not sufficiently hot)."

[1] https://www.tetley.co.uk/sustainability/product-and-packagin...

[2] https://twinings.co.uk/pages/faqs

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#85

Post by forgotmypw17 »

hammock wrote: post #15
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely possible, many tea bags do not contain plastics, and are instead made of cotton, hemp, or other non-hazardous materials.

Most tea bags are made of Manila Hemp (a banana plant). Many have a heat-sealable thermoplastic such as PVC or polypropylene on the inner tea bag surface as well, that you never feel or hear about

There are some survey reports on this out there that I have seen. It is common for more expensive teas, and ones labeled "organic" to be plant fibers only, but there are exceptions. If you want to figure it out on your own, you can take an empty teabag, briefly set it on fire and blow it out, then smell the smoke. Personally, I usually pour the contents into my cup or tea pot and throw out the teabag.

https://www.google.com/search?q=which+tea+bags+contain+plast...

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#86

Post by gpt5 »

oever wrote: post #77
gpt5 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple carbon filter in your fridge should suffice. Sub micron microplastic (nanoplastics) have not been detected yet, and their sustained existence remains speculative. If you are still worried, just install a reverse osmosis system. It also has the benefit of filtering away sub-nanometer particles that are actually proven to have negative health effects (such as heavy metals and bacteria).

When microplastics break down they get smaller and become nanoplastics. Nanoplastics have been detected. Here is a paper that shows how to measure nanoplastics. Dilute solutions with polystyrene particles from 400nm down to 40nm were prepared and measured. Demineralized water was put in a polystyrene cup. Microplastics were removed and the remaining nanoplastics were measured. A concentration of ~10^12 particles/l wa…

They've been detected in a synthetic lab condition, but not in the wild.

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#87

Post by jacquesm »

dylan604 wrote: post #45
hedora wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a related note, today’s paper straws are apparently covered in PFAS, even though paper straws existed way before plastic was commonly used. I assume you could just coat the straw in food grade wax, but for some reason that’s not commonly done.

I can only imagine food grade wax being way more expensive than PFAS type chemicals. Probably easier to apply as well. Just thinking of all the "reasons" companies would state as to why they justify poisoning us all.

PFAS will potentially put 3M out of business just like talcum powder did to J&J.

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#88

Post by wilg »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #22
changoplatanero wrote: post #3

I guess it's not possible to design a tea bag that's not made out of plastic but that can also survive the boiling hot temperatures?

No, that's very possible. The problem is our obsession with making everything single-serve and disposable. I think this is what you are looking for: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=stainless+steel+tea+infuser+ball

It's an obsession with convenience, which doesn't have to mean single-serve or disposable. Loose leaf tea is slightly less convenient. It's very hard to argue with people to give up convenience, but if you can figure out how to make loose-leaf tea easier than bags I think people will do it.

Also, there are some cost and shelf life concerns: https://spoonuniversity.com/lifestyle/a-steep-dilemma-tea-ba...

Also, apparently here's some stats about loose-leaf vs bagged tea: https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1093592/preference-for-te...

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#89

Post by ljf »

hammock wrote: post #19
endisneigh wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

believe it or not but it's OK to consume the tea leaves and drink slightly bitter tea ;). if you accept this the solution is just not to have tea bags at all. brew with the leaves and drink immediately, and if you forget, enjoy your bitterer tea!

I eat kiwi skins too. The amount of pesticides used to grow them though means it's probably not the best idea

I LOVE kiwi with the skin on. I rub the fruit against my jeans or a tea towel first, then just eat like a pear. Really adds to the whole flavour (like how eating a pealed apple is nice, but a whole apple can be better.

Re: UBC device uses wood dust to trap up to 99.9 per cent of microplastics in water

#90

Post by WJW »

jacquesm wrote: post #87
dylan604 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only imagine food grade wax being way more expensive than PFAS type chemicals. Probably easier to apply as well. Just thinking of all the "reasons" companies would state as to why they justify poisoning us all.

PFAS will potentially put 3M out of business just like talcum powder did to J&J.

J&J still exists and will continue to exist though? They settled for some 9 billion, which is a lot but not enough to sink a company with a ~400 billion market cap.
Post reply on HN