162
submitted 6 months ago by j4k3@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

I imagine all plastics will be out of the question. I'm wondering about what ways food packaging might become regulated to upcycling in the domestic or even commercial space. Assuming energy remains a $ scarce $ commodity I don't imagine recycling glass will be super practical as a replacement. Do we move to more unpackaged goods and bring our own containers to fill at markets? Do we start running two way logistics chains where a more durable glass container is bought and returned to market? How do we achieve a lower energy state of normal in packaging goods?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

PLA (polylactic acid, commonly used for 3D printing) is made from biomass, and is thus sustainably sourced.

Bio-PET is functionally identical to petroleum-based PET, but is readily produced from plants, and is thus sustainably sourced.

I don't think energy is a particularly scarce commodity. We are utilizing only a tiny fraction of the energy readily available to us. We haven't even picked the low-hanging fruit of energy production yet.

We gave up on reusing glass bottles in large part because they were not sanitary. Every boomer has stories of finding cigarette butts in their soda and beer. Previous buyers regularly used their empties as ash trays before turning them in for the deposit, and the cleaning process was not nearly as effective as one would hope.

A better cleaning process would be needed to even consider commercial reuse of consumer glass today. Superheated steam, for example, would burn off pretty much any organic material, and machine inspection would be able to identify remaining contaminants and defects.

[-] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 6 months ago

Renewable sourcing is nice, but that doesn’t really address the main problem, which is what happens to the plastic after you’ve used it. If it’s burned, it will release the previously stored carbon into the atmosphere. If it’s recycled, the carbon stays in circulation. If it’s biodegradable, it solves the plastic problem for the most part.

[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 4 points 6 months ago

"Biodegradable" and "burning" release the same mass of carbon into the environment. Burning releases it as CO2. Biodegraded plastic releases that carbon as methane.

Biodegradability is not a desirable property of trash bound for a landfill.

[-] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 6 months ago

Actually it depends on how it decomposes. Anaerobic processes tend to produce methane, whereas aerobic ones usually produce CO2. Anyway, I was mainly thinking of the microplastics though. Biodegradable plastic wouldn’t stay in a harmful form for thousands of years, but it would still produce carbon in some form.

load more comments (11 replies)
this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
162 points (98.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43623 readers
1170 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS