• lagg_mine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    At the times it take to make these, I bet there will not be much left of the PET molecule structure.

  • bitteroldcoot@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    9 hours ago

    The process takes ~2 days, costs ~$60/kg, and can’t scale to the 400 million tonnes of plastic waste produced annually. Jason Hallett of Imperial College London: “There’s no way you could do this commercially. We’re not gonna be eating plastic cookies.”

    Nobody has even had the courage to taste one.

    It’s all hat and no cattle.

    • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      It’s not as bad as it sounds.

      Still, a new dystopian scifi trope is born. Can’t wait to see it in action: “ingredients: 50% PET bottle sugar, 40% insect protein, <10% human excrement, flavor, coloring”

      • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        By the way the article and researchers describe it this is going to target rich people that want to feel they are doing something for the environment, while keeping all their habits (kind of like lab grown meat).

    • Fondots@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      NileRed on YouTube has done a few interesting things like turning plastic gloves into hot sauce through different chemical processes.

      It’s more of a fun science demonstration than anything meant to be even remotely practical to create food from waste, and there are some pretty nasty chemicals involved in some of them that really have no business being anywhere near food

      But it does I think drive home the point that everything is basically made out of the same stuff and it’s a matter of figuring out how to break it down and put it back together in the right way to be useful.

      • A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        But it does I think drive home the point that everything is basically made out of the same stuff and it’s a matter of figuring out how to break it down and put it back together in the right way to be useful.

        One step closer to my favorite utopia, Gay Space Communism* (replicators).

        * coined by rightwing chuds, but I really like this term.

      • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The alchemists were right, they just focused on the wrong area of the periodic table. We can’t turn lead into gold, but we can turn plastic into mouthwatering hamburgers!

        • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          You can turn lead into gold; it was something that was demonstrated in my HS science class. It’s just that the chemical used to make the change is far more valuable than the gold you get out of the process.

        • gwl [he/him]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          9 hours ago

          We’ve so far turned lead into gold 2 times

          It’s just so expensive it’s not worth doing except to see if you can

          It’s also weirdly easiest to turn things much more radioactive but further away into gold, such as Osmium, but the gold that it produces is radioactive

        • veryblandusername@fedinsfw.app
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          We actually can turn lead into gold and fairly easily now, it’s just that it would cost you billions of dollars to make pennies worth of gold.

        • Akrenion@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Actually we can turn lead into gold by shooting it with particle accelerators. It is not profitable though.

      • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The researchers on this one are convinced they can eat the cookies. And while scientists underestimating personal risks isn’t unheard of (hence why they need university approval), it means there isn’t anything obviously dangerous with this process.

      • WesternInfidels@feddit.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The ones I remember reading about all come with a big caveat: The organisms can only work after the waste has been through some capital and energy intensive pre-treatment, like thermal depolymerization, which makes the economics unworkable for recycling.

        Maybe one day we can do the heat treatment with direct solar energy.

      • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        14 hours ago

        This kind of thing always have a long trail of “almosts” before a breakthrough makes it viable outside of the lab. Every attempt makes us closer to it.

        • hirihit640@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I once saw a comment saying that a bacteria that consumes plastic could be apocalyptic if it got out of the lab and spread everywhere

          • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 hours ago

            I mean, aren’t most of these “scientists find microbe that eats plastic” stories just them finding something in the wild that already has such an adaptation, rather than engineering something new? The idea that a plastic eating organism makes plastic nonviable to use anymore is a bit like saying that we can’t make stuff out of wood, paper, natural fibers like cotton or wool, etc, because those things will degrade given the right circumstances and time.

          • YoSoySnekBoi@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Not really apocalyptic per-se. The nightmare scenario would be that plastic would start bio-degrading similar to wood products and become far less viable as a material for long-term use containers. Yeah, it would require a massive shift in how we store things, esp. highly reactive chemicals, but it’d hardly be apocalyptic.

    • CannedYeet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      In that movie the cover was that the different flavors of Soylent (not just green) were made from plankton. That would be less bad than this.

  • ikt@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    15 hours ago

    i love when left wing progessive lemmys loop around and turn into hard right conspiracy theorists

    this also isn’t a meme, does this comm have any moderators?

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Lemmy is just awful about reacting only to the headlines, especially with popsci reporting. The above referenced work is kick ass - converting one of the most common garbage plastics into sugar with a bioengineered yeast is cool as hell. sure it’s a headline born of the petite dystopia we live in, but it’s a really optimistic breakthrough and not at all a dystopian thing in itself.

      • cosmos8188@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Yep, a lot of people jumping to conclusions from the get go. And I agree, bioengineering is really cool stuff.

      • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Lemmy is just awful about reacting only to the headlines

        That’s pretty much normal all over the internet. It’s a bad human behaviour heavily exploited via attention economics, of course such bad traits get reinforced. Staying in one place and thinking gets disincentivised (you might even put down your phone! Outrageous!!) and outright punished through dark patterns and antifeatures, faster scrolling and high frequency interaction with populistic takes is being rewarded with shiny stuff on your profile, Karma, hearts, stars etc.