This is the most frustrating article I’ve read in a while.
Experts say the new material breaks down quickly in around two to three hours, depending on its thickness and size.
Okay? What does it break down into?
But it’s hoped that the new non-toxic material could offer a future solution as it disappears completely.
What material is it and how did you determine it’s non-toxic?
Researchers say it is made by combining two small molecules which form a strong bond that allows the new material to stay tough and flexible.
Which two small molecules? Methyl mercury and cyanide are small molecules.
When placed in a mixture which had the same amount of salt as seawater, they found the new plastic dissolved “quickly in about two to three hours, depending on its thickness and size.”
What does it dissolve into?!
Takuzo Aida, lead researcher at CEMS, explained: “Similarly, when tested in soil…a piece of plastic about 5 centimetres in size, it completely disappears after a little over 200 hours.”
No it doesn’t fucking “disappear.” That’s not how any of this works. Just because you can’t see it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Did a child without object permanence write this?
Recent studies have shown the damage microplastics cause as they pollute the environment and create health problems for animals, because they can be easily eaten.
Dissolved chemicals don’t even have to be eaten, they can be inhaled by water breathing animals. They can also potentially bioaccumulate and pose a hazard to people eating seafood which a lot of people do in Japan.
He added: “In Japan, almost all packaging is made of plastic, and if we can really manage to reduce that, we can expect less environmental damage.”
Then pass single use plastic regulations. Switch to recycled paper. Switch to bamboo. Switch to hemp. Switch to banana leaves. Use less packaging in general. Normalize having people bring their own containers. Pay people better so they actually have time to cook at home instead of having to buy fast food while working overtime. A new type of plastic doesn’t solve the root societal problems that led to this. This is so blatantly a status quo enforcing non-solution.
Fuck this article. It tells you nothing other than useless fluff. Which makes me think this product is definitely a scam like every other “eco friendly plastic.” Either that or BBC couldn’t be bothered to translate any of the technical information they gave them.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ado1782
sodium hexametaphosphate or sulfated polysaccharides and guanidinium sulfates
The first two are edible. Not sure about the last.
And releases all of its microplastics?
Yeah - just like those Magic Erasers. Block of 100% microplastics.
Same as regular erasers then?
Well, regular erasers can be made from plant based rubber. So no.
My thought as well.
The article claims it disappears entirely and does not leave microplastics but there’s nothing to back it up and I’m still skeptical.
For people who don’t know, CBBC and Newsround is directed towards children. Not saying it couldn’t have been written better, of course. But it’s intentionally simplified
Even so, teaching kids there’s no difference between something dissolving and disappearing is blatant misinformation. If they wanted to teach scientific concepts, they should actually teach how they work.
If your target audience is kids, you have to be more careful with your wording because they have limited background knowledge and will likely take everything you say at face value. Otherwise you can create life long misconceptions which they pass along to the next generation because they assume it’s true.
These are the kinds of articles every science teacher hates because when they try to teach real science all the kids will go “nuh uh! I saw it on BBC! How can the dissolved solids be in the water when the news says it just disappears?”
And that’s saying nothing about the implications of teaching kids that we’ll just innovate our ecological problems away. The status quo is fine, and no one needs to change their own behaviours, just wait for the eco friendly products to roll in and consume as normal.
I do agree with you. But your sentiment applies to primary school teachers across the globe too. Children at that level are not typically taught by science teachers who are passionately against these kinds of simplifications. Those people end up teaching older children/teenages/adults who are more able to discern these differences.
My parenting style would be much more scientific than this. Though pushing it further, you could argue that it does disappear, it’s no longer visible. Though I doubt the authors of the article made that distinction
Seawater sellers hate them!
