• NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It’s not even about the cost so much. Bioplastics just aren’t a good substitute for synthetic polymers for a lot of applications, usually because they’re water-permeable. This article doesn’t address the characteristics of the particular bioplastic they tested, but most of them are based on corn starch.

    Water permeability is what makes the plastic biodegradable - water penetration allows bacteria to get inside the material and break it down. It also makes the plastic useless for medical applications, most industrial applications, anything electrical, anything outdoors, and even food packaging - it can’t be a drink bottle because it’ll dissolve, and it can’t be a bag for dry food because it won’t keep the food dry. Maybe you could use it for take-out containers, short term stuff… hard to imagine another use case.

    The relative permanence and water-blocking nature of synthetic polymers is what makes them useful. It’s also what makes them such a terrible waste problem.

    • YungOnions@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      Sure, but that doesn’t stop if from being a replacement for normal plastic in situations where water permeability isn’t a problem. I’d prefer this replace at least some conventional plastics, wouldn’t you? Let’s not let perfect be the enemy of good here.

      • Lmaydev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        I often see comments like that where unless it’s a 100% solution in all situations it’s pointless.

        • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Except bio-plastics have been around a long time. I remember a Beyond 2000 show about packing peanuts made from corn starch that dissolved in water. They never caught on because they dissolve in water. Imagine your package gets rained on and you get your item in an empty, gooey box.

    • Shurimal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      it can’t be a bag for dry food because it won’t keep the food dry.

      What dry foods actually need to be in a watertight container and how often do you immerse your packaged dry food in water or leave it in a humid environment? Back when I hiked a lot our circle of friends packed all the dry food we took into reusable fabric bags and had no problem keeping it dry for weeks in snow and rain.

      Quite a lot of dry food is packaged in paper or carton—flour, cereal, couscous, sugar etc. For some reason (at least where I live) most dry food that are my staples like rice, pasta, buckwheat is packaged in plastic but could just as well be packaged in paper. It’s not like rice or pasta is more vulnerable to humidity than couscous or sugar (packaged in paper/carton).

      • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Your camping excursion is not the same as international shipping. A container will see vast swings of climate on its travel.

        • Shurimal@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Somehow all the dry foods that are shipped internationally in carton boxes seems to do just fine…