
Plastics recycling with microbes and worms is further away than we think (2018) - EL_Loco
https://cen.acs.org/environment/sustainability/Plastics-recycling-microbes-worms-further/96/i25
======
carapace
Two promising technologies:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization)

Heat and pressure turn plastic back into oil.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_oxidation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_oxidation)

Oxidize plastic in a molten salt bath, exothermic reaction, produces
_synthesis gas_. "... destroys all organic materials while simultaneously
retaining inorganic and hazardous components in the melt."

------
scythe
Trash incineration with district heating is highly underrated. Not only does
it save space and prevent methane emissions from landfills, it also lowers the
urban cost of living. Unlike an enzyme, oxygen will destroy almost any kind of
plastic.

[https://stateofgreen.com/en/sectors/district-
energy/district...](https://stateofgreen.com/en/sectors/district-
energy/district-heating/waste-to-energy/)

------
forgotmyhnacc
Apologies if this is off topic, but I've never read such a well researched
science article, citing many primary resources and papers. Well done.

~~~
pen2l
One should hope so, if it’s on ACS website. And their journals are also pretty
reputable and have pretty high impact factors. :)

------
southerndrift
What could possibly go wrong if those microbes inevitably get into the wild?
This should recreate the situation with cellulose. At first, trees didn't
decompose but nowadays, you have to prepare wood if you want to use it long-
term.

Plastic is used because it doesn't decompose. What good would plastics be if
they wouldn't be stable anymore?

------
astazangasta
As the article indicates, the problem is not necessarily technological but
economic; trying to find a market-based solution to a notable market failure
might be a sign of a pathology of our times.

~~~
WalterBright
The solution to "internalizing the externalities", which is the economic
jargon for such, is to tax it.

If you want more of something, subsidize it. If you want less, tax it.
Governments are good at taxing things.

Taxing it aligns the economic incentives to produce the desired outcome,
rather than banning it which leads to all sorts of distorted outcomes.

~~~
onemoresoop
More and more countries are banning certain uses of plastics such as plastic
bags and one time use plastics. Do you think that’s gonna have a distorted
economic outcome? I think we could step out of the economic bubble sometimes
and do things that are good for the environment - without which there would be
no economic activity possible.

~~~
WalterBright
> Do you think that’s gonna have a distorted economic outcome?

Yes. Typically, such laws embed exceptions. But the exception list is always
inaccurate.

For an example, when the EPA set fuel economy standards for cars, it exempted
trucks. The station wagon disappeared and was replaced with the SUV, which was
a "station wagon" configured to pass the EPA definition of a truck.

Instead of banning plastics and having an ever-wrong list of exemptions, raise
the price (via taxation) so other materials become cost effective.

------
konschubert
Should we maybe not try to recycle plastics, but just try to contain them in
landfills?

Our atmosphere is polluted with CO2, wouldn't recycling or incinerating
plastics release even more of that?

~~~
wiz21c
In the same vein : why not produce/use _less_ plastics ?

~~~
meruru
That's easy to suggest and hard do. How are you going to change the behavior
of entire populations? We are already trying education.

~~~
notatoad
Price it appropriately. For the vast majority of the uses of plastic, it isn't
the best solution, just the cheapest. Keep adding tax until something more
sustainable is cheaper.

~~~
hackerbabz
I wonder if people would start drinking tap water or disposable wooden water
bottles first.

~~~
burke
Milk cartons work perfectly well for water too.

~~~
adrianN
Milk cartons contain plastic.

~~~
ComputerGuru
They don't have to and not all do. There are non-plastic food-safe
waterproofing liners for cardboard.

------
the8472
Note that the article only covers PET. Some polymers are much more difficult
to decompose, e.g. PTFE.

~~~
ReptileMan
But their mass is orders of magnitude less than PET. We just don't use that
much teflon relatively speaking.

~~~
hammock
PET is by far the most common plastic, and it's not the most dangerous (to
humans or the environment).

------
leeoniya
what about feeding cows seaweed?

[https://foodtank.com/news/2017/06/seaweed-reduce-cow-
methane...](https://foodtank.com/news/2017/06/seaweed-reduce-cow-methane-
emission/)

~~~
telotortium
Interesting in its own right, but has nothing to do with this article.

------
a2tech
Is it really? I've just assumed all along that it won't be during my life time
(outside of small scale demonstrations and special plastics).

I think most recycling (outside of obviously simple wins like aluminum and
steel cans) is a joke, designed to keep people busy and distracted while real
polluters (like aluminum manufacturers who use gigantic amounts of electrical
power mainly derived from coal plants and over the road truckers who are still
fighting implementing 30 year old emissions standards) go about their
business. We train children that recycling paper and yogurt boxes is going to
save the planet when in reality consumer recycling is a drop in the bucket and
amounts to basically nothing.

